Hi there. Can I ask how old the boy was? I do think the school overeacted by suspending the boy without question. Being an art major in college, I've done nude drawings. The models were very professional. I find the human body a lovely thing to draw. But I do think this is a tricky situation too. I think when you introduce children to pictures with nudity in it, you should be careful. I remember being 10 years old looking at a picture book on the Human Body and there was a picture of a nude man (only it showed his backside). I don't know when it's a good age for kids to start seeing nude pictures, but I do think that Americans in general tend to overact when it comes to this kind of stuff.

art can be anything. there is no solid definition of "art". this girl and the principal who suspended him are stupid. i hate it when people try to say that nudity isn't appropriate in some art. ignore the fricken nudity, and just focus on how well it was drawn. this annoys me so i could rant forever on this topic. but i'll shut up now. :P

for those who are saying that people shouldn't see nude art i have to disagree.
I been into art since i was very young. And also i been in college art (didn't have to draw naked people but still) There has been in art naked people for so long it it's art art and not just some boy being perverted i do not see the problem. But then again many people who think people being naked in art is trying to get ride of art. look at the art in the ancient art there all naked in there art the saw the human body as art it self it's only now a days who do not see the human body as art they see it as an object.

I don't understand though she was wearing a bathing suit... ._.
I am pretty sure I saw worse stuff than that on Sailor Moon when I was a kid. LMAO! Lol even Arielle from the little mermaid flashes more skin then that.

This kid does not need to be suspended, honestly this is such an overreaction. That girl who was offended obviously has some mental issues.

"Art: –noun
the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance."

~Dictionary.com

1. A dot in the middle of a canvas can be art. Though I tend to think it's kinda lacking; I'm a preraphaelite fan.
The human body is one of the most beautiful and interesting things to draw. No two humans are shaped exactly alike or with the same combination of attributes. And the nude form is worth studying and admiring.

2. Personally. I think that the age for being exposed to nudity is roughly around 7-10 years of age. My reasoning is this: That is usually the age that children are curious about themselves and the differences between the sexes. Curiosity should be quenched gradually and scientifically. I don't mean show them porn. Buy a grey's anatomy book or something. When I was a child I had a little book with cut outs about the human body and it had little cartoon naked people and looked at the pictures in my dad's nursing text books; it did not warp my brain, moral bend, or my sexuality in the slightest.

3. The drawing in question didn't appear to be a nude, she was sitting on a chair in a very non-sexual manner, there's no reason for an image such as that to be considered 'pornography'.
American schools are bearing the weight of raising the children of the country without the power to do so and it shows in their overuse of what minuscule power they do possess. That and I bet 5 bucks that the girl's mother has a similar attitude to the girl and threatened the poor principal till he gave in just to make her chill out.

@the_paper_crane: Tell the kid for me that he did a good job and that great artists are, at first, persecuted. Leonardo De Vincci (sp?) was and he kept plucking on. He should continue in his art, from what I saw he has potential. (~_^)

This is an interesting subject. I always draw the figure nude before I clothe them so I don't think it's a big deal at all. I don't even consider it true nudity unless there's detail in it. I agree that people are too sensitive about nudity there's no reason why we should be ashamed of the naked body. It's only 'wrong' for children to see the nude body if its something sexual but it doesn't have to be.

Originally Posted by the_paper_crane

Really? A fig leaf?
But there were so many nude statues and paintings that had been done before. Perhaps though, it was only for portraits.

And it's true; you're right on that note with censorship.

The problem with David was that he was a Biblical figure, and it sort of made people nervous during the Renaissance. There had been virtually no nudes in western European art since the Classical period, and the Renaissance was trying to emulate the Classical period. They were okay with nudes in general, just sometimes, they were not so keen on Biblical heroes being portrayed nude, even though some artists did get away with it in some works. It may have to do with who in particular commissioned the work and where it was to be displayed. You have to remember that at this time in history, people didn't make the art they wanted to, they made what a patron told them to.


Anywho, I think it has more to do with who you show it to. The girl was not necessarily wrong in being offended, but the school was wrong in suspending him. It's a little severe for what he did. I think someone should have given him a stern talking to, explaining why a young girl might be offended by that. Even if he didn't mean anything by it, the girl took it the wrong way, and that is the issue that needs to be addressed, not what constitutes as art.

i believe sexually implicated art is disgusting, but it is also very widely accepted in the manga community.
chances are he drew a girl from a shounen manga, and he should have never brought that to school.
it's along the same lines as playboy magazine. not hardcore porn, but disgusting nontheless.

( now, i'm assuming that's the type of thing he drew. if not, i don't understand why they would call it porn. )

i think it's a shame that so many people are drawing perverted things, and don't feel like there's anything wrong with that.
we all know why people draw that stuff.

The girl most likely was fussing about it since there were boobs in the picture ( even if he didn't draw the nipples some people get really angry and think that you're drawing to draw like a whore or something... >__> ) I'm sure in highschool it would be acceptable but if the kid was in middle school where kids are still inmature and not used to things like that atleast one person would fuss about what he drew. :/

You should quoute the article. You didn't write it.
Anyways, art is when you create something out of something.
I mostly do photograph, which is 'creating' a photo of out of my camera and the thing/person that i'm photographing.

wow that drawing really isn't considered pornagraphy o,0 you can see worse at a beach and its sad that a girl is offended because of that art in college is 10x worse you draw naked women and it is totally acceptable and people are basing off of that now i think he shouldnt have been suspended and yes it does depend on the age but this is acceptable for namely all ages.

I believe the girl ripped up the page then lied to her parents telling them this kid drew a woman out of a Playboy so they make a scene at school just because the boy draws better than her :cool: Because seriously, the girl in the drawing is in an 80's swimsuit, you see worse on TV (Tila Tequila? :D), and there are no exposed parts there.

That principal I bet is the kind that will do anything to please parents so they don't attempt to give the school a bad name. The worst kind, because they will go against innocent students *sigh* Please do this kid a favour and tell him to draw more, so by the time he's about to graduate, he can show better drawings to a more acceptable audience ;D

It's wrong to give children the idea that nudity is something dirty and lewd. I remember a time when I saw a painting of a naked woman in an art calendar and copied it later into my sketchbook at school (I was on second grade). Naturally my classmates were either staring with their eyes wide or giggling uncontrollably. Couple of boys said: "She's naked! Why did you draw a naked woman??"

I couldnt answer them but my teacher (bless that woman) picked up my sketchbook and said: "It's art." After that she scolded the boys for making fun of me. That wasn't the only time she encouraged me with my drawings. I think It's part her fault that now I'm studying to become an animator. I'm not sure if I would have gotten away with it if I lived in the USA, though.

Yeah, there will always be ignorant people in the world who will burst into laughter or consider one a weirdo for drawing or painting a nude image. I generally am around more open-minded people (whether they're artists or not) who understand the expressiveness and beauty of the nude human form.

This is debatable, but I firmly believe that pin-up pornography (such as playboy) is also an art form. It may be meant to stimulate arousal, but art (in general) is supposed to spur a reaction out of the audience whether it be arousal, anger, joy, etc. You know what I mean.

Nudity in art has never been a big deal to me. I had decent art teachers from the get go, so that probably had something to do with it. But I always understood that nudity in art was different from porn. I'm of the artistic camp that if the artist says it's art, it is art. However, even though say- Hentai artists call their work art I don't believe it's appropriate to show it to some groups of people.

That's not because I think it should be censored. I just feel that the intent with Art is very important with considering an audience. If someone is drawing pornography, that doesn't make it not-art, but it makes it pornography first. The purpose of tentacle porn is not to hang in a fine art gallery or play on kid's tv, obviously. Just as a manga is made to be read, not hung in a fine art gallery.

I do think, from the drawing, that no one should have gotten suspended and the principal should have spoken to the parents about WHY it wasn't inappropriate, and that no one should get suspended for a drawing when tha suspender hasn't even SEEN the drawing.

"Acceptable" is only what society deems it to be, just as it is with moral and ethical questions . . . or, in this case, art. It depends on when and where you show it. Acceptability, morality, and ethics are not set things known from the moment of birth, but taught. So I don't think there can be any concrete answer to these questions or whether or not there needs to be regulations about this type of thing. It depends on if you're showing your art to Europeans, Americans, Chinese, Christians, Atheists, your father, mother, aunt, someone you don't know, etc. Some people have stricter regulations or "moral guidlines" than others.

I, personally, don't think there needs to be any guidelines or regulations. If people like it they will buy it (or a product it's advertising for . . .) and if they don't they won't buy it. If it offends people, they don't need to look at it. They can compain about it, of course (I would not want to take away someone's right to speak their mind), but ripping art up . . . I think that's going a bit too far. (I hope I made my point and didn't completely ramble or go out of order. If so, I appologize.)

I used to draw nude people I saw in paintings when I was nine, and that wasn't because I was sexualizing people. That was because I was trying to figure out how to draw people better. I didn't even know what sex was!

Both the girl and the teacher were probably raised in in a somewhat strict family at least. The type of society or family someone grows up in always plays a part in whats viewed as acceptable. The only real problem is communicating with many different people in public. I tend not to worry about people who go off the hook on just a swimsuit that shows too much leg. I know every member here has met more than one. And if they really want to make a scene out of it, point out that different views on something isn't bad. If they still want to gripe thats their problem.

well if he drew her then he deserves it otherwise the girl had no right to be upset

lol. school is hardly the place to decide what is acceptable. If you seriously think about it. A lot of the great artists have all studied nudes and figure drawings. If Da Vinci went to school he'd get kicked out for showing most of his work too. So I wouldn't take anything the public school system says to heart.

Basically when a parent complains, results happen. I used to draw all sorts of stuff I shouldn't have in school. And as long as you hide it and don't make a big deal out of it, you can get away with it.

There is no such thing as acceptable or unacceptable art. It's either art or it's not so I don't think you're asking the right question. The question here is what is it the masses/audience want?
There was a Filipino artist who's work was recently rejected from an art show he was invited to. Their reason was that the woman in his painting was naked and it was either he covered her 'offending parts' or changed his work completely. The artist said that his work had nothing to do with sex. It was a social commentary (either about corruption or something to do with how most Filipinos want to be American, political stuff) and that they would have to take it or leave it. They, being a Muslim country, left it.

Obviously if it were up to artists they would go every which way but it's either the prude and closed minded or the people who cannot wrap their head around concepts and representation that are causing most of the trouble.

----------

Take the Philippines for example. The Roman Catholic church has a strong hold on the country. Contraceptives are not promoted, there are no family planning clinics here and it almost had Harry Potter banned.

There was a law the Filipino president tried to pass, a law that was to censor everything even art. There would have been no nudity allowed on TV, movies, magazines and in the fine arts! Thank goodness that it didn't happen!

Art simply falls victim to people who cannot or refuse to understand.

I can understand why nudes would be a problem at age 12. I don't find it disgusting unless they are being molested or raped. Nudes are base of artistic study. There is a bathing suit line as well as under drawing lines. I think the school went to far with this and should have consulted a trained art teacher to look over it. It'snot nude at all. It's an unfinished drawing. This is case awful and the school should be punished for it.

All art is actually acceptable. Pornography is not a form of art work but you can make something erotic into art work. Major art show a few years back showed photographs of poll dancers. There is visual artist realm to them, since it took them out of pornographic world.

nudity is not the problem. Its the audience. That can be pretty traumatizing for a 12 year old girl. anyway, too bad for the kid with good intentions, but i really want to question him why he drew a naked woman in the first place.

LMFAO, that is a ridiculous story (and I have that book, lol)!!! People get offended way too easily these days. He's just a kid!!! :(

I think that words are words, and art is art. I think that such things as swear-words have just been made up by someone random, and after that it's been "a bad thing" to use it. They are words, they don't hurt anyone.

The same goes with art. What's wrong with drawn nudity? Everyone knows how do we look like without clothes, so what's the big deal if you draw it? Manners, rules, terms, ideals... People have just made them up.

But of course without them this place would go all banana smoothies .___.