Should Art Be Censored Research Paper

As times past, we were given an artist like Robert Mapplethorpe, Banksy, Basquiat, and many others. They said and did what everyone were afraid to. To censor art is to take away a piece of history that artist worked hard to be a part of. Now, according to Google "Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions." This is everything art is but put in a vague definition. If the artist did not offend a few people, there would be no deep meaning. Art should not be censored if it has an inappropriate part because every form of

Censoring without consideration can have a miss understanding of an artist work and it is changing things that should not be changed. The worse thing is, a person who can decide rather an art should or should not be censored can take offense of an artist work and censor it. The thing that triggers censorship is a person’s lack of knowledge of the inexperience on the subject at hand. Not knowing if it is positive or negative could make the creators viewers overthink the content of the work and assume it to be inappropriate based on the image or work that is censored. A dead artist cannot defend their selves neither can they explain or elaborate what is going on in their artwork. Changing or blocking a part of someone’s work suggest how we hide from certain realities or are ashamed of the truth artist world and how it really was the. Making it seem like it should be hidden from the viewers or too unbefitting for the world's eyes. The meaning behind a piece of art is more important than what the form is, so to censor something because it shows mature content is inconsiderate. Some works are from artists that are no longer alive and dead artist would be turning in their graves if they knew how we were denouncing their

Since the birth of Christ man were not ashamed of being nude and it was actually normal. Why should art be censored when it is a part of our culture? No one thinks twice when they buy a famous artist like Picasso’s art, but they don’t know that most of his creations were disfigured women. Many artists that are in history book’s work are shown as beautiful when nude while recent artist work are looked at as inappropriate and offensive. Back in the high renaissance era they drew, sculpted, and painted almost everyone naked. Art such as Michelangelo’s David, Katsushika Hokusai’s The Dream of the Fisherman’s Wife, and Titian’s Venus of Urbino were judged, but never censored from its audience. Here is a perfect way to get the brain thinking, no one complained when Da Vinci took the halo off Jesus. Before The Last Supper that many are familiar with that was painted by Leonardo da Vinci, there were many other that depicted Jesus as a god by adding a halo. The truth can still be shown without censoring anything off. While looking at how the decision to censor is made the thought never comes around about censoring pictures from events like slavery and the holocaust. Now I understand that it is good to teach the youth about what our ancestors went through and in places like china certain historical events are blocked. It is very