Contoversial quilt story on MSNBC...what do you think?
03-03-2011, 05:37 PM
#41
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hopewell, VA (for the moment anyway)
Posts: 1,692
It appears that all the creator of the quilt has really done is cause division.
03-03-2011, 05:42 PM
#42
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 8,710
Originally Posted by Candace
Art is art. I can't believe in this day and age people still call a naked body "pornography". Pornography is sexual content. This quilt, is not about sex and is all about awareness. I don't exactly care for it, but it doesn't bother me in the least.
magazines. I think the children are exposed to worse things on tv that they watch, even the cartoons. JMHO
03-03-2011, 05:47 PM
#43
Super Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,572
art is art, like one member said...how many naked paintings, statues, etc exist in the world???...that being said, why is this quilt such a problem???...also, art mimics/depicts life, so they should think about that
03-03-2011, 05:50 PM
#44
Super Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Emmitsburg, MD
Posts: 1,599
Originally Posted by MistyMarie
Yes, I am aware of the figurative aspect of this quilt. However, I see it for what it is... not reading into it. I don't go to quilt shows to get the "metaphorical" meanings, but to appreciate the colors, the patterns, and the craftmanship that goes into the quilts.
Having grown up with an artist for a mother, I have been through hundreds of museums and can appreciate metaphorical art. This is not "art" that I can appreciate. No different, to me, than the metaphorical painting in the Smithsonian that showed Jesus in a jar of urine. I didn't care what the artist was TRYING to get across; all I saw was a disgusting painting.
Having grown up with an artist for a mother, I have been through hundreds of museums and can appreciate metaphorical art. This is not "art" that I can appreciate. No different, to me, than the metaphorical painting in the Smithsonian that showed Jesus in a jar of urine. I didn't care what the artist was TRYING to get across; all I saw was a disgusting painting.
However to my earlier point, I personally don't understand how anyone can forget the rich history and stories told by the traditional quilts we see here today. It's like we chop things up and sew them back together just because they're "soooo prreeetttyyy!" There are stories here every single day about making quilts for loved ones who are far away or sick or grieving. We make quilts for children without families, and for cancer patients. We make them for animals in shelter and NICU babies. They MEAN something.
If they don't mean anything then why don't we just buy the stupid things and have done with it? It would certainly save us a ton of time and money, not to mention heartbreak when a recipient throws it in the dog's crate.
ETA: I wasn't interested in the Jesus urine jar either, but I wouldn't belittle the artist's work or intent. *shrug*
03-03-2011, 05:54 PM
#45
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Okinawa, Japan/ southwest Missouri
Posts: 112
I would think that the artist could still get the point across without such detail in that specific area. I am 32 and would not want my children-boys 12 and 10- to see it all layed out there like that. To me, it is something private and not to be put on display.
However, I don't think the quilt shouldn't be allowed at the show, perhaps somewhat secluded with a warning or something. I can imagine walking from one quilt to the next admiring the stitches here, the placement there, then BAM! its in your face. Would be quite a shocker to me...
However, I don't think the quilt shouldn't be allowed at the show, perhaps somewhat secluded with a warning or something. I can imagine walking from one quilt to the next admiring the stitches here, the placement there, then BAM! its in your face. Would be quite a shocker to me...
03-03-2011, 05:54 PM
#46
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 107
Originally Posted by BobbiSue
MistyMarie wrote:
Do you think ANYONE will look at this quilt and think that they should do more for naked, pregnant women showing off their privates while sitting in a box?
It's a metaphor. Come on, now.
*****
A metaphor???? For what? Indecency?
Do you think ANYONE will look at this quilt and think that they should do more for naked, pregnant women showing off their privates while sitting in a box?
It's a metaphor. Come on, now.
*****
A metaphor???? For what? Indecency?
03-03-2011, 05:54 PM
#47
Power Poster
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 26,010
I personally hate it when politics has to override art.
The quilt may not be pornographic, but it most certainly is indecent. People have a right to expect to be protected from indecency in public. If there were a live person exposing those parts in the same room, I guarantee you they would be hauled off on charges of public indecency.
The quilt may not be pornographic, but it most certainly is indecent. People have a right to expect to be protected from indecency in public. If there were a live person exposing those parts in the same room, I guarantee you they would be hauled off on charges of public indecency.
03-03-2011, 05:56 PM
#48
Power Poster
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 26,010
Originally Posted by QuiltSage
Why do you consider a vagina indecent? Lots of people have one.
03-03-2011, 05:56 PM
#49
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Perry, Oklahoma
Posts: 4,373
Didn't and wouldnt of bothered mean to each there own is my motto...
03-03-2011, 06:01 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 649
Originally Posted by cathyvv
People express themselves in different ways.
As with any piece of art, you are not forced to look at it.
If you don't like to look at it, don't look. Problem solved.
As with any piece of art, you are not forced to look at it.
If you don't like to look at it, don't look. Problem solved.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cmputerdazed
Links and Resources
3
03-30-2011 07:53 AM
