Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jalisco555
Does anyone consider Michelangelo's David porn? The very question is absurd.

I have heard of some who wanted to cover reproductions of David. There were also some cardinals who ordered the loin cloths to be added to Michelangelo's Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel.

To me, nudity alone is not pornographic, and many on this thread nailed that. It has to excite to be pornographic. (But, of course, different people are excited by different things....let's not go there.)

103 posted on 05/26/2005 5:36:37 AM PDT by Republicanprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Republicanprofessor

Many years ago, when the show was still funny, the Simpsons did a clever bit on this subject. The statue was touring the US and some mothers objected that it was harmful to children so a fig leaf was strategically placed.


114 posted on 05/26/2005 6:13:50 AM PDT by jalisco555 ("Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us and pigs treat us as equals" Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: Republicanprofessor
I have heard of some who wanted to cover reproductions of David.

We recently had a battle about that very thing here in Richmond within the last 6 months. Seems one snotty person thought that David was "inappropriate" (repro statue in front of a mediterranean restaurant) and insisted on covering it. Finally, saner heads prevailed.

120 posted on 05/26/2005 6:43:21 AM PDT by iceskater ("Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." - Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson