Recently I had a conversation with an artist on the topic of controversial art.  It got me thinking not only about art that may seem controversial to some and their right when confronted with such, but also about the right of an artist to show what some see as controversial art? 

We live in a society where if someone is offended by a work of art they see in a gallery or exhibition or public space for that matter; they have a right to bring litigation in court against it. In some cases they have won settlements against the artist or the venue exhibiting the artwork.  But what of the rights of the artist to exhibit work some may find controversial?

The artist I was talking with held a seminar –in China I might add--on what constitutes a work of art that could be considered controversial or in this case pornographic.  In the course of presenting a slide show, he showed a picture of female genitlia where upon the audience was audibly responsive. By his accounts things quieted down and he went on to finish his presentation. Later, he admitted that in retrospect he could have used a different, less explicit, artwork and would do so in future. In the end, no one brought suit and many were pleased with the seminar.

In America a similar situation presented a different result when a young women was shown; in the course of a seminar on sexuality, a picture of an interracial couple in the act of lovemaking.  While she could have left, she stayed to the end. Later, she filed suit in court against the school for having been exposed to pornographic material she found offensive.  The absurd thing is the court sided in her favor and she won a large monitory settlement.

Now I am not going to use this forum to debate which art is pornographic and which art is not pornographic.  What I am interested in is why is it allowable for anyone who is offended by such work to bring litigation against someone who exhibits work deemed to be offensive to this individual. What happens to the artist who has the same rights to exhibit a work he or she deems appropriate and not necessarily pornographic. Does it become a problem of perception or actual fact? Is it only a matter of personal taste or does one individual dictate to the whole?  After all, what one finds offensive another may not and vice versa. I see much artwork I find objectionable and in bad taste, but do I have a right to seek legal representation to stop it?  More importantly, is this a case to be settled by the courts?  Is this not just a difference of opinion between people?  I don’t always agree with the taste of others but I agree they have a right to their taste even if I find it offensive. Freedom to choose is the American way.