Photos confiscated by Sally Mann in Texas have aroused old arguments about obscene and freedom of speech.

Recently, the request of local Republican officials, the four photos of the famous artist Sally Mann were removed from the wall of the Wasburg Museum of Modern Art. Local Republican officials claimed that these photos constituted children's porn products. The Vossburg Police Department is currently investigating the allegations.

These photos were taken more than 30 years ago. In the photo, the children of Mann were naked in their own remote farms in Virginia. They were included in the exhibition named “Family Diary”, which also exhibited photos of famous photographers Lota Ruby Fraser, Nan Gordin, Catherine Opei and others.

One of the seized photos depicts the melting popsicles on her son's naked torso, implying the innocence and chaos of childhood. In another photo, Mann's naked daughter walked across the desktop with a tip of her toes, not only showing her power, but also her fragility.

For decades, these works have attracted people's admiration, and of course, it has also caused condemnation.

I am an art historian. A recent book recorded the rise of the first Federal Anti -obscene law in the United States in 1873. Stock is called the Constack Act.

Nowadays, the Consto Act has become the focus of news because it prohibits abortion drugs. Abortion drugs are considered obscene forms like pornographic images, sculptures and sex toys. But in the early days of the law, it was used to confiscate a large number of art and literary works that are regarded as obscene, obscene or pornography. Although this form of review system was later regarded by a number of rulings from the Supreme Court of the United States, the debate about what constitutes obscenity, children's pornography and art expression still exists.

For me, the deleted events around Mann's photos echoed those picky pasts.

Evangelical foundation

In the entire career of Constack, the gospel Christians are the most enthusiastic supporters of his work. They are behind the scenes of the New York to stop the Sin Association, and the association funds his investigation.

Constant's review activities are diverse. Sometimes he pursues nude sketches, oil paintings and sculptures. But even the relatively mild actress's wearing tights can cause his anger.

In Wosburg, opposition comes from local Christian activities and organizations. The most important of these is the Danberry Institute. The Institute wrote an open letter to the Volgorg Museum, accusing Mann's photos of “make the pedophilia normal” and accused the exhibition of ” Promote the “collapse of the family definition of God” that the agency claimed that the Bible is “authoritative, wrong, and sufficient. “

Consto also believes that “God's Law” should become the guidance criteria of American law. In order to prove that he seized and destroyed a large number of images and items in his 43 -year career, Consto often claimed that he was fighting Satan.

When it comes to the explicit pictures circulating in the bar and bar, his efforts are popular. But when he was aimed at art and popular culture, he eventually conflicted with Americans a more free and diverse attitude.

The court expands the freedom of speech

Throughout the 20th century, the Constant Culprit lost most of it.

Judges and juries are increasingly supporting citizens' freedom in cases involving freedom of speech, which has greatly expanded the scope of the first amendment.

In 1973, the Supreme Court formulated the obscene “test” of three parts. The last point of the test is that if a work has “serious literature, art, political or scientific value”, it is not obscene.

In my opinion, no credible saying can prove that Mann's long -term prestigious photos do not have serious artistic value.

After Mann's photos were deleted, art advocates quickly pointed out that the detained images appeared on the websites of famous museums across the country. The national opposition review system and artists facing the risk organization alliance issued a strong statement to support Mann's photography exhibition.

According to reports, the Office of Public Security Officer held by these images is evaluating whether they violate the pornographic regulations of children in Texas. However, because Mann's photos did not depict any sexual behavior, the only phrase that could be regarded as the relevant phrase that could be regarded as “obscene exhibition” in the state law was defined as the intention of irritating sexual desire.

Here, the background is the key. As a critics who delete Mann's works, “Most people who read this article can easily divide the museum and open PornHub.”

Texas officials have opted to delete some photos of Mann from the exhibition and suggest that they may be children's pornographic works, thus depriving them of their background as a artwork. Through this, they introduced these photos to the audience. These audiences will never see them at the Art Museum, but now they may search them online with lustful intentions.

I couldn't help but see my connection with the Crusades of Constant. To some extent, his efforts are counterproductive, because his angry goals, from the student's nude model drawing to breeding literature, eventually got more publicity than other situations.

The curator also plays a role

Despite the protection of law, the curator is still very sensitive to the behavior of artistic works that may offend the audience, and formulate a set to adapt to these sensitivity.

Three years ago, as a researcher at the University of California's National Freedom and Citizen Participation Center, I interviewed the curator and curator of the academic art museums and galleries across the country.

My research focuses on how museum professionals handle exhibitions that may be controversial. They talked to me about the best practice. For example, highlighting the displayed content warning allows viewers to choose to participate or completely avoid the exhibition. Thinking about the placement and supplementary comments of the thoughts increased more backgrounds and triggers thinking and discussion.

The curator of “Home Diary” obviously follows these best practices.

They explained the goals of the exhibition: “examine the complex concepts of the family” and show the views of women, LGBTQ and non -binary artists and themes. The audience can see a content warning before entering the gallery: “This exhibition has a mature theme, which may be very sensitive to some audiences.” Museum staff provided the wall label, visit and artist discussion.

These contributions put the exhibited arts in the wider conversations about American families today, and these families have diverse formation, definition and lifestyle.

In other words, they show these serious and thoughtful art works.

Although I can't imagine any successful criminal prosecution, I do think the damage has been caused. This may be a goal from the beginning.

Threats to take legal actions will undoubtedly have a cicada effect. The Museum of Modern Art in Wosburg must deal with the problem of losing potential donors. Criticism in response to official and public requires time, money and energy.

During the Constantk era, citizen free activists, artists, and art organizations stood up to deal with the challenges of defending freedom of speech.

Those who value artistic expression today must follow their footsteps.