Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nude Art Blocked By PTA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nude Art Blocked By PTA

    Here's what I think is a case of a PTA promoting the idea that nude = lewd.
    web page
    NuTex

    Rolly and Wells: Student's painting of a nude honored but it's too much for PTA

    Paul Rolly and JoAnn Jacobsen-Wells
    Salt Lake Tribune Columnist

    Courtney Moffett, who won second place in the annual Reflections art contest at Jordan High School, was invited last week to the district awards ceremony, where all the winning entries from eight high schools were to be highlighted.

    Or so she was told.

    The theme of the parent-teacher-student-association-sponsored Reflections contest this year was "I am really happy when . . ." Moffett's entry, "At One With Nature," featured a Hawaiian woman sitting nude on a river bank, placing a flower in her hair. Revealed was a side view of a breast and her buttocks -- way too much skin for contest officials.

    Moffett arrived at Eastmont Middle School only to discover that her painting was not on display. It also was excluded from the program in which each piece of art was shown on a large screen with the creator's name and school.

    Only Moffett's name was flashed on the screen.

    "The content [of Moffett's painting] was not appropriate for the venue [a Jordan School District school], and it did not represent PTA values," said Jackey Bruin, president of the district PTSA High School Council.

    Funny that Jordan High's Reflections judges didn't share that view.

    Moffett's painting was not sent on to the state Reflections contest. But if you want to view it, e-mail Moffett at [email protected] and she will send you a photo.

  • #2
    Here's what I think is a case of a PTA promoting the idea that nude = lewd.
    web page
    NuTex

    Rolly and Wells: Student's painting of a nude honored but it's too much for PTA

    Paul Rolly and JoAnn Jacobsen-Wells
    Salt Lake Tribune Columnist

    Courtney Moffett, who won second place in the annual Reflections art contest at Jordan High School, was invited last week to the district awards ceremony, where all the winning entries from eight high schools were to be highlighted.

    Or so she was told.

    The theme of the parent-teacher-student-association-sponsored Reflections contest this year was "I am really happy when . . ." Moffett's entry, "At One With Nature," featured a Hawaiian woman sitting nude on a river bank, placing a flower in her hair. Revealed was a side view of a breast and her buttocks -- way too much skin for contest officials.

    Moffett arrived at Eastmont Middle School only to discover that her painting was not on display. It also was excluded from the program in which each piece of art was shown on a large screen with the creator's name and school.

    Only Moffett's name was flashed on the screen.

    "The content [of Moffett's painting] was not appropriate for the venue [a Jordan School District school], and it did not represent PTA values," said Jackey Bruin, president of the district PTSA High School Council.

    Funny that Jordan High's Reflections judges didn't share that view.

    Moffett's painting was not sent on to the state Reflections contest. But if you want to view it, e-mail Moffett at [email protected] and she will send you a photo.

    Comment


    • #3
      Perhaps INA could create a page to display her controversial art on INA's website. They could ask her to write an article to accompany it.

      What better way to promote acceptance of non-sexual nudity than to recognize and applaud a young woman who seems to understand that nudity doesn't necessarily equal sex?


      Just a suggestion.

      bg

      Comment


      • #4
        I knew there was a reason I didnt like the PTA...........


        might as well call them the prudish textile association.

        Comment


        • #5
          Im surprised she couldnt have taken the PTA to court for doing that to her, she won that contest fair and square and the PTA had no right to do what they did, there isnt anything obscene about that kind of photo, I mean it didnt even show her fricken genitals for cryin out loud. These guys never made many brownie points when I was in school and obviously their insanity continues even after I get out. I sometimes wonder what idiots they have running the PTA anyways.

          Comment


          • #6
            Goodness, NuTex, this happened basically in my backyard and it would appear that you found out about it before I did.

            I have seen a digital image of the drawing, and I think that it is lovely - beautifully done, delightfully innocent. It makes me think of simpler times. I think it's profoundly sad that we insist on such blatent body-shame as a society. No doubt, in this culture, any member of the PTA that thought it was fine, probably wouldn't have said so out of fear of retribution. Obviously, I'm not part of that PTA.

            How times have changed from my Junior High art class (in Utah) which included classical nude drawings/paintings as part of our education. This is not progress as a society, not in any way.

            Comment


            • #7
              For those who want to see the painting in question, see the link below:

              http://cheef.com/newspics/courtneyphoto1.jpg

              It is very unassuming.

              Bob S.

              Comment


              • #8
                Of course, we as nudists aren't going to see anything wrong with that painting. Even if it was a full length frontal I wouldn't see anything wrong with it. Unfortunately, There are too many people who have the insane notion that certain body areas are obscene and shouldn't be shown. I'm sure that had she painted a bikini on the woman, no one would have had a problem with it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks Bob S for finding us the link!
                  NuTex

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yeah this isnt even REAL nudity for cryin out loud, its an artwork and schools have been showing this nude stuff in art for who knows how long and you cant even see her genitals, if her nipples were covered in sure no one would have a problem with it. Anyways why couldnt they just fuzz over her nipples when they showed the picture? I know itd be insulting to the artist but thats better than denying it and not showing it or accepting it at all. I think her parents shouldve got a lawyer and sued these guys for what they did. Thats just discriminatory where they accepted the artwork that was less than hers over hers just because they found it objectionable.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The art says worlds about the maturity of the artist. Denying it's proper place says worlds about the immaturity of the "adults" in the PTA.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        If the PTA is immature enough not to be able to handle artwork then how can the schools expect them to handle their children and their future? I still think a good lawyer and a lawsuit was in order for that girl and she shouldve sued those PTA members good.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Very nicely stated, luvnaturism. I'm told a follow-up article in the (local) newspaper makes it sound like this incident has created something of an international uproar (and this is a good thing, I think [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img] ). I'm also told that the article quotes a PTA representative as saying "nudity is not art". It's amazing to me how real beauty can be so close to so many, and yet they refuse to open their minds and see it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I really think most of these PTA people are simply ignorant. How the hell can they say "nudity is NOT art" when a good proportion of art IS nudes or nudity in some form. I think this is the one normal venue in society where nudity is accepted as normal and for these pack of idiots to say nudity isnt art just goes to show their stupidity and just makes me beleive more that such idiotic people have no business whatsoever being in education. I wouldnt want one of these bozos tellin some kid I know that "nudity is not art".

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              To imagine that a group of organized adults (PTA)can come up with the preposterous idea that a nude painting is inappropriate for the "venue" where other art is being shown is pure censorism and an outrage.

                              It sends the message that nudity in art is wrong and that nudity is bad and should not be attempted by a student. I can't believe that the parents and general public don't scream out in opposition. Then again, maybe they are so wrapped up in their puritanical religious beliefs that they astoundingly AGREE....

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X