Where I live, there resides a rather well known eccentric millionaire who loves to plant commissioned art pieces all around the plains of West Texas. His most famous effort was when he paid a group called the Ant Farm to design and install ten Cadillac cars into a field by a major highway. These ten cars are the finest of the fin models from 1950-1960 and they are buried noses down in a line at the exact angle of the Great Pyramid of Ghiza. The piece is called the Cadillac Ranch and it's the stuff of Bruce Springsteen songs and gloriously ridiculous poetry. Some call it junk. Some call it pointless. Just the same thousands of individuals the world over drive the long flat roads of the High Plains just to see it, write graffiti on the cars and memorialize the occasion in photographs. Stanley Marsh's Cadillac Ranch may not be art, but it sure is something.
|
"There's so much on the adult Internet that saddens and disturbs me but I won't be arrogant enough to say I know the difference between art and smut or idea and assault." |
I always think of Stanley when I am asked or ponder the question "What is art"? For a while, Stanley used to have three large, stuffed beanbag-type pieces on his ranch that were shaped in the form of the letters A, R and T. The red, yellow and blue letters were placed in clear view so anytime someone asked him what he though art was, he would simply point to those three letters. Art -according to Stanley Marsh III- is open to interpretation.
The United States House of Representatives recently passed a new ban on virtual child pornography. The Supreme Court threw out the old ban because it was too vague. With the best of intentions, politicians and lawmakers who know nothing about computers have been desperately trying to regulate a rapidly expanding Internet.
A preponderance of users, cheap web space and news group activity gave birth to a new medium for individuals to transfer or deliver all kinds of computer friendly goodies, the most famous one being porn. Because the medium is new and spans the planet, laws are a little hard to apply much less enforce. While no one is arguing the fact that child porn is horrific and illegal, the computer/internet delivery method of it blurs the line of demarcation between crime and creation.
An evil scum-sucking bastard can take a picture of a lewd act involving a child. They can dress it up with their favorite graphic software program so cleverly, no one can tell -by naked eye- the model contained within is real or digitally fabricated. They can soften the image so a face is unrecognizable. They can affix the photographed heads of children onto the bodies of adult models so the content appears to be child porn.
A computer is a powerful tool in the hands of anyone and it saddens me to imagine scenarios for evil. Just the same, some forms of imagery or art will always offend many. Unless physical harm was done during the creation process, a drawing or story or piece of art is an idea and ideas should never be illegal.
I will gladly help castrate the asshole that steals children, does bad things to them and then takes pictures. But when I'm asked to punish the person who writes a story ABOUT the very same thing, I can't. If Moe sicko can create a virtual 3D interactive program that mimics the enactment of sex with a child and no actual children were involved in it's creation, is it criminal software?
According to an article written by authors Best and Luckinbill at Crime Library.com, there are three types of pedophiles. Keep in mind, pedophiles should not be confused with someone who engages in/fantasizes about underage sex. Pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children, not blossoming teens. The pedophile wants young children and is shunned by all respectable modern societies.
The first kind of pedophile is the closet one who never reveals nor shares their secret and rarely acts out their disgusting fantasies. The second kind is the isolated pedophile who lives alone, associates with few and actually performs illegal acts against children. The third kind is the sharer who not only performs appalling acts but also shares and many times profits from production of porn involving children.
Untitled Page
The one thing that is centrally common to all these types of offenders is their collection of child-related illegal or erotic materials. They've all
been shown to have a collection of kid smut when they've been discovered/arrested.
Ideally, one would assume that if we rid the world of those who produce child porn, then pedophiles would have nothing but their own imaginations to feed their sickness. Complications come when we realize child porn can exist without a real child ever having been involved.
The experts tell us molesters use child porn as tools to seduce/brain wash their victims. Molesters also use candy and dress up as birthday party clowns in order to stalk their victims. Clowns may scare me personally and candy may rot teeth but I could hardly cry out for their banishment simply because they COULD be used as tools of evil. I'm still torn about this whole issue of "Virtual" child porn.
The House is getting a little closer to a clearer definition this time around with their ban wording. This time the ban applies only to computer images that are "indistinguishable" from child pornography, not just material that "appears to be" child porn.
I guess this means porn that looks exactly like real kids are modeling. It doesn't ban stories or drawings or anything that looks less than realistic. I'm not sure what they are referring to, frankly. 3D modeling technology is far advanced but it's not advanced so much the naked eye can't distinguish it from the real thing.
A kid's head pasted onto an adult model's body can be made to look pretty darned realistic. Does the ban include this kind of porn? I admire the US political body for its concern and enforcement of child welfare. I hope that they can find a way to hunt down and arrest those who molest children and punish severely those who profit from the sexual exploitation of kids.
I hope they have an easier time than old Stanley and I have when it comes to discerning art. There's so much on the adult Internet that saddens and disturbs me but I won't be arrogant enough to say I know the difference between art and smut or idea and assault. The human mind can be a very bad place but a fantasy is not a crime.