Posted on 08/27/2009 1:29:33 PM PDT by Steelfish
Art or obscenity? A nude model is arrested at the Met August 27, 2009
Venus de Milo, Liberty leading the people, Lady Godiva ... and next?
Nudity has been a staple of the visual arts since time began, but apparently the real thing is still too much for some people to handle.
On Wednesday, a 26-year-old model was arrested in New York after posing for a photo shoot at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Police said Kathleen Neill was posing naked for a photographer in full view of visitors at a gallery in the museum's arms and armor department.
Neill has been charged with two crimes: endangering the welfare of a minor and public lewdness, according to her lawyer, Donald Schechter. She was released from police custody Wednesday and is scheduled to appear in court on Sept. 22.
"She didn't do anything sexual. She didn't perform lewdly and she made no reference to her genitalia," Schechter said in an interview with Culture Monster.
"There are nude sculptures and paintings all over the museum. It's the height of stupidity accusing a live model of showing the same thing in a house of art."
The photo shoot was conducted by Brooklyn-based photographer Zach Hyman for an upcoming art show. (Hyman has not been charged with any crimes so far.) "It's a project I've been working on for three months now -- it's the idea that nudity isn't necessarily perverse or sexual," he said in a phone interview today.
Hyman didn't have formal permission to photograph in the museum but he said that "people take personal pictures there all the time."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
Was she guilty or not guilty?
Well, if she was violating their rules it could be trespassing. Being naked in NYC is not illegal I think. If the model and photographers were engaged in a business venture without the buildings/museum permit it could be a lawsuit.
Uh... how bout some pics... just to ascertain guilt or not..
nope. FR doesn’t allow nude pics...
Sounds like a grandstanding “artist” to me. Also, I suspect there are fees for photoshoots in the Met, clothed or unclothed, and he probably just didn’t want to pay them.
“It’s a project I’ve been working on for three months now — it’s the idea that nudity isn’t necessarily perverse or sexual,”
####
Wow.
Aren’t you just the hippest, edgiest, most revolutionary thinker around.
No one said nudity is perverse or sexual ONLY. Only a closed-minded leftist obsessed with sex would think in that manner
But centuries of human history have recognized the wisdom of keeping it private.
Posted purely as a public service. Innocent as a fluffy kitten in pure, driven snow.
As Dave Barry sez: "I'm not making this up".
Soooo not guilty.
I noticed at Auburn University that the Art Dept. sure doesn’t pay the nude models very much. A few years ago it was $15 per hour which must translate to 15 per session which doesn’t make it worth going over to the studio.
Guerrilla filming is frowned upon, but you can get away with it if discreet. Nude guerrilla filming is a little over the top and methinks the so called artist wanted the free publicist.
aren’t you kinda proving the point that it is obscene if you need to use black rectangles?
Typical cheap liberal jerk.
Well, it depends on what she looks like.
If she weighed 300 lbs, she should have been arrested. If she looked like Monica Crowley, probably not.
NOT GUILTY!!!!
if you go to the source, he was taking nude pictures on the subway, previously. Probably the transit police are more forgiving, considering what they have to put up with every day.
For every photo shoot he does and theres been a few he always keeps his attorney on speed dial and some extra cash on hand, just in case.
Sounds to me as if he knew this would cause trouble. Just guessing, but part of his schtick seems to be to create *news* for himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.