What Constitutes Acceptable PDA (Public Display of Art)?
 |
| Crystal Barbre's mural beside Deja Vu (photo by Scott Moore) |
Well-known Seattle artist Crystal Barbre was commissioned to
create a classical-style mural in oil paint beside Deja Vu on 1st Ave in
Downtown Seattle. The mural is a celebration of the strong female form, and
she's been working on it for the better part of the month with positive support
from local residents and passers by.
But Seattle has strange obscenity laws. The city has zero
issue with public works of art depicting full frontal nudity... as long as they
aren't attached to a strip club.
The original sketch approved by Deja Vu contained nipples
(they're part of the female form), but Seattle's obscenity ordinance prohibits
"lewd [and] sexually explicit matter... outside of [an] adult
entertainment establishment." Of course Deja Vu would prefer to keep the
nipples and honour the original intention of Crystal's vision. But the
definition of 'lewd' & 'sexually explicit' is subjective, and the language
in the ordinance is ambiguous enough that what began as an empowering art
installation could potentially shut down the business.
To avoid legal complications for her friends at Deja Vu,
Crystal has covered the nipples, but very much in protest, and the issue has
sparked a debate in Seattle's art community about what constitutes acceptable
PDA (Public Display of Art).
Jen Graves wrote an awesome article for The Stranger:
And Sarra Scherb followed up at Vanguard Seattle:
Seattle Muralist Crystal Bargbre Alters Her Work to Skirt Obscenity Laws
It's high-time we as a society moved beyond over-sexualising
and demonising the feminine form. It's time for us to free the nipple in public art.
~ BCDuncan
No comments:
Post a Comment