My censorship policy on the high school level is relatively simple:
I tell my students I am paid with taxpayers' money.
I also tell the students that they can not produce work that is sex or
drug related because tax payers do not want to see that being produced
in the classroom. End of story. Everything else is pretty much fair
game within the boundaries of the specific assignment. I also design my
assignments in such a way that the student must declare a thesis
statement and defend that statement both in writing and visually. So
violence for violence's sake for example is NOT a thesis statement.
(although arguably a thesis statement for a more mature artist, working
WITHOUT the patronage of the federal government).
As for nudes in the classroom, if the image is not drug or sex related
(i.e. Michaelangelo's David is NOT drug or sex related), we may use
those images for discussion. We would NOT for example discuss or tackle
Playboy images, which might include for example a photographic
reproduction of Botticelli's Venus in a contemporary sense.
Our district does not have a policy with specific regard to the art room
and images produced. I tell my students that they may produce ANYTHING
they want on their own time, in their own homes, with their own money,
but that our restrictions in school have to deal with the notion of
being government/taxpayer sanctioned. In 26+ years I have had my
students win awards, go to art colleges, and become working artists (as
have we all have on this list), and I don't think they have been
"damaged" in any way by my restrictions.
Dave Wuerffel wrote:
> I am a student and would appreciate the opinions of experienced art
> instructors on these questions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 30 2000 - 09:02:45 PDT