Welcome to the Quilting Board!

Already a member? Login above
loginabove
OR
To post questions, help other quilters and reduce advertising (like the one on your left), join our quilting community. It's free!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst ... 2 3
Results 51 to 69 of 69

Thread: Contoversial quilt story on MSNBC...what do you think?

  1. #51
    Super Member JulieR's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Emmitsburg, MD
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by sewbizgirl
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiltSage
    Why do you consider a vagina indecent? Lots of people have one.
    It's not the vagina, but the act of exposing it in public which is indecent. There are laws on the books against this.
    What are the laws with respect to perceived indecency as it applies to art? I'm not being snotty, I honestly don't know.

  2. #52
    Super Member MistyMarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,430
    I have a RIGHT to not like this quilt. I am not casting stones at the quilter; I am saying I DON'T LIKE IT. I DON'T LIKE my children seeing something like this. I am a very modest person and I screen what my kids watch, send them to a private Christian school (so they are not exposed to this kind of "art" and the like in a public school), and I plan on keeping their innocence as long as I can.

    So, instead of respecting my opinion, I feel like I am being attacked for not liking this quilt and not wanting to expose my children to this. Being upset with my opinion of this quilt is pretty hypocritical.

  3. #53
    Power Poster nativetexan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    home again, after 27 yrs!
    Posts
    15,694
    Blog Entries
    2
    yes but this can be viewed as offensive. i doubt anyone going to see a quilt expected the chance of seeing one made like this one was.
    artist's are always pushing the boundries just because they can, not because they should.
    Private areas of the body are called private because they should remain private. it seems todays' gotten lots of people just plain Ok with anything that goes. not a good thing.

  4. #54
    Super Member MistyMarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by nativetexan
    yes but this can be viewed as offensive. i doubt anyone going to see a quilt expected the chance of seeing one made like this one was.
    artist's are always pushing the boundries just because they can, not because they should.
    Private areas of the body are called private because they should remain private. it seems todays' gotten lots of people just plain Ok with anything that goes. not a good thing.
    I so agree!

  5. #55
    Super Member JulieR's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Emmitsburg, MD
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by MistyMarie
    I have a RIGHT to not like this quilt. I am not casting stones at the quilter; I am saying I DON'T LIKE IT. I DON'T LIKE my children seeing something like this. I am a very modest person and I screen what my kids watch, send them to a private Christian school (so they are not exposed to this kind of "art" and the like in a public school), and I plan on keeping their innocence as long as I can.

    So, instead of respecting my opinion, I feel like I am being attacked for not liking this quilt and not wanting to expose my children to this. Being upset with my opinion of this quilt is pretty hypocritical.
    As I said before I'm pretty sure you aren't supposed to like it. I don't care that you don't. But I do take exception with the idea that this isn't art at all and shouldn't be described as such, JUST BECAUSE you don't like it.

    And if you recall I did say I thought a warning of sorts was probably a good idea, so that children can learn at the right time and in the right way about the social ills of our society, and that it is right to have compassion for those less fortunate instead of spitting on or condemning them for the situation they are in. I'm pretty sure your kids are learning that at their private christian school, so they should be getting the lesson with or without the art quilt in question. Right?

  6. #56
    Super Member JulieR's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Emmitsburg, MD
    Posts
    1,624
    And with that, I'm out. No sense in beating my head against the wall any more tonight.

  7. #57
    Super Member gale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    North-Central Indiana
    Posts
    4,637
    Blog Entries
    1
    It wouldn't bother me at all. However, we grew up knowing and believing that the female body is a beautiful thing, not something to hide and be ashamed of. That's not to say we walked around naked or anything, but my dad had plenty of topless "art" all over the house. Our friends were often surprised but never seemed to be offended. It was just a non-issue in our family.

  8. #58
    Super Member JanetM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At my LQS
    Posts
    2,355
    Quote Originally Posted by MistyMarie
    I have a RIGHT to not like this quilt. I am not casting stones at the quilter; I am saying I DON'T LIKE IT. I DON'T LIKE my children seeing something like this. I am a very modest person and I screen what my kids watch, send them to a private Christian school (so they are not exposed to this kind of "art" and the like in a public school), and I plan on keeping their innocence as long as I can.

    So, instead of respecting my opinion, I feel like I am being attacked for not liking this quilt and not wanting to expose my children to this. Being upset with my opinion of this quilt is pretty hypocritical.
    I am in total agreement with you, so you are not alone.

    If the quilter wanted to make a statement about homelessness..fine. If she thought depicting the woman in the nude was a metaphor for being stripped of all she owned...fine

    Why did she have to display her spreadeagle? Certainly not for artistic sake, but to shock and possibly to offend.

    Someone mentioned the many nudes in art through the ages. Michaelangelo did beautiful nudes. Reuban painted beautiful nudes. Neither felt the need to pose the women in such a manner as to disrespect the women.

    Would those in support of this quilt, also support men's magazines that leave nothing to the imagination? Many an adult bookstore have defended their presence near elementary schools by calling their magazines "art" and considering their art as "free speech".

    I stand by my position that this quilt is offensive to me, and quite honestly, I think the artist would be pleased, because I think that really was her goal.

  9. #59
    Super Member MistyMarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,430
    Again, I have the RIGHT to not consider it art. I can smear a booger on a canvas and call it art, but is it?

    My children do learn about compassion for those less fortunate, but NOT by looking at a quilt of a naked lady. I doubt anyone would learn compassion from this quilt, except maybe to have compassion for the quilter who thinks that this quilt is going to make a difference in the plight of the homeless.

  10. #60
    Junior Member ergranny46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    144
    Blog Entries
    15
    I'm an RN and in all my years as a nurse I helped with a lot of pelvic exams. Let me tell you there are prettier things in the world to put on your quilt than genetalia. We quilt for ourselves, family, friends and causes. Some are beautiful and some are not. Sometimes we need to take all that pain and hurt from our lives and purge it from our hearts and souls. So we take all the hurt and pain and put it onto cotton, little pieces, big pieces, straight, curved and somehow all that pain becomes something beautiful or maybe it's not. We don't care. We just need to quilt. So keep quilting and make it something from your heart.

  11. #61
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    201
    Here we are in 2011 and we are still finding the human body repugnant, offensive, pornographic. I never cease to be amazed...............

  12. #62
    Power Poster Sadiemae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    11,454
    Blog Entries
    20
    (I'm an RN and in all my years as a nurse I helped with a lot of pelvic exams. Let me tell you there are prettier things in the world to put on your quilt than genetalia.)

    I kept thinking this whole time, that it is just not the prettiest part of a woman's body. Thanks for posting this, I so agree with you.

  13. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Enid, OK
    Posts
    8,923
    Blog Entries
    1
    ART is one thing, but at a "quilt" show, unless it were part of an exhibit and people were told that it would be there in the open so that they had a choice as to whether or not to look at then, it really had no place!

  14. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Enid, OK
    Posts
    8,923
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JanetM

    I don't think this artist did get her message across. We are talking about the explicit detail depicted on her quilt, not homelessness issues.
    THANK YOU!

    Not one person at the at that quilt show or in this thread thought about the "message" of being pregnant and homeless!

    It is more about the fact that the show producer's chose to show that quilt without a warning to show attendees. Those people who PAID to see a quilt were shown something Sexually oriented that offended them. That makes it porn and wrong.

    and to me the message was "should have kept my legs closed"!

  15. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Enid, OK
    Posts
    8,923
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by LucyInTheSky
    I'll have to click the link at home... work block. There was a magazine 6 months (?) ago that had controversial quilts. I believe one showed someone giving birth, one showed something with Jesus, things like that. And the publisher put the magazine in a plastic bag to avoid complaints about the "explicit" nature.

    that was actually 2 years ago, Mark Lipinski did it in HIS quilter's home. Joann's refused to sell that issue! and NOTHING in that magazine was like this quilt! BUT they were deemed offensive.

  16. #66
    Super Member MDMPanther's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,456
    I actually went to the Mid-Atlantic quilt show in Hampton, Va this past weekend and saw the quilt in question....and while it might be offensive to some, the focus of the piece was on the plight of a homeless woman/women. In it's own right, it was a beautiful piece and I find that any art that causes one to think, strikes a chord of some kind has served it's purpose. yes, it was a bit graphic and perhaps and option to view or not may have been in order or a warning at the least, but the kind of uproar the MSNBC piece depicts IMHO is so unwarranted. I realize everyone has a right to their opinion and so it is what it is. There were other pieces at the show that were disturbingly beautiful to me for other reasons and evoked deep emotion in me as well. Some people use paint and a brush, some people use lyrics and a melody, and some of us use fabric and thread!

  17. #67
    Senior Member Dani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    beautiful Olympic Peninsula
    Posts
    635
    Blog Entries
    1
    I wholeheartedly agree with you. It certainly has drawn attention to the plight of homelessness and it's ramifications, which was probably her intention.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabrielle's Mimi
    A non-quilting male friend just sent me this link to a story about a newsworthy quilt in a quilt show. Apparently there was an uproar over the fact that it depicted a naked woman in more detail that one might expect on a quilt...hard to tell, though, since MSNBC blocked it out on the video. I have not seen the quilt, but first impression is that art is art, and we ought to let people express themselves without censure. More importantly, however, is that this quilt depicts the plight of a homeless pregnant woman literally stripped of all she owns. Since we are women who should be concerned about the plight of homeless, victimized women, perhaps we should be more upset about the ramifications of homelessness on women and children, and less worried about body parts, which presumably, most of us own. IMHO, I think the artist is trying to shock us into paying attention and solving the problem of poor women in this country and around the world. What do you think?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...79136#41779136

  18. #68
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Mabank, Texas
    Posts
    8,276
    If it were in a musem or an art magazine it would be considered art. Why not on a quilt? People do not have to look at it even though it's on display yet, they chose to look at in in detail although they could just glance at it and walk on by. Some peole just have to much time on their hands.

  19. #69
    Moderator Jim's Gem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Camarillo, California
    Posts
    35,480
    Ok, this is getting a little too heated. It's apparent that people have strong opinions on this topic. I think we have heard enough. If we can't play in the sandbox nicely we will close the sand box!!!!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst ... 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.