Surname 1

Student Name

Institution

Course Code: Course

Instructor

Due Date

Should Freedom of Expression include Controversial Art that May be Seen as Highly

Offensive to Certain Viewers?

Art is a powerful tool that can be used to express ideas, improve understanding, and

assemble communities. Art is meant to be provocative and interesting. Often, art not only elicits

emotions from the viewer but also from those who work on the piece, including artists and

producers. But its expression can also provoke thoughts, feelings and arguments that are often

difficult to mentally handle. Some suggest that controversial art should be censored because it

can be seen as offensive to certain viewers. However, by censoring controversial art, we deny

ourselves the opportunity to interpret new or different ideas. The censorship of a piece of artwork

can lead us to live in a narrow world where we limit our understanding of anything beyond what

is considered "normal. The framers of the Constitution knew that such censorship could lead to a

society that is narrow minded and ignorant. Such is why they designated freedom of express as

one of the most important rights in our nation's history. The First Amendment protects citizen’s

freedom of expression from government interference. In the United States, a work of art is

protected if it is considered "artistic works." Artistic works include fictional fiction, photographs,

paintings, sculptures, work of art based on literary works, music and dance. There should be

limits on the expression of some works, such as hate speech and art that is meant to incite war
 Surname 2

and hate. However, art should not be censored just because it appears offensive to some people.

This essay will argue that it is the right of every American to express their views through art

without fear of censorship and that freedom of expression should be able to protect all

expressions, including those that are deemed controversial.

Art allows people to express themselves and understand others in different ways.

Freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment allows a person to express their

beliefs through artistic means. The meaning of art is important in understanding why art can

never be censored even if the work is considered controversial. The definition of art states that:

"the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form

such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or

emotional power (Tushnet)." This includes the application of any medium including paint, pencil

drawing, sculpture or digital art. The final creation is known as a piece of art. It is also important

to note that art represents the emotions of the artist and the thoughts of the audience. For

example, a painting of a cherry blossom tree is not only an image of a tree but also tells us the

thoughts and feelings of the artist while they were creating it. Art allows us to explore our own

emotions as we interpret what we see. This can lead to new understandings and appreciation for

other cultures, beliefs and traditions. Art is designed to evoke emotion out of both the audience

and the artist so that we can better understand each other through our experiences in life

(Tushnet).

Therefore, having understood the meaning of art, I believe that art should never be

censored due to its ability to trigger emotions and thoughts. To censor art just because somebody

did not like it is to censor freedom of expression simple! Some people argue that we should

suppress the controversial art because they are considered offensive. But who is qualified enough
 Surname 3

to determine which art is good and which is controversial? The debate over art censorship goes

back to the 18th century where art was more widely accepted. During this period, Americans

believed that art was for everyone. Art was thought to be a reflection of the thoughts, beliefs and

emotions of the artist. In addition, people viewed art as a way to understand and appreciate

different cultures, traditions and history (Chiang and Richard). Therefore, it has been said that

"the founding fathers" believed that democracy would not survive in America if people could not

speak their minds using artistic means. I understand that some people may find a work offensive

because it is against their religion or views but if we are a diverse culture, these kinds of different

expressions are always going to be present and censorship should never be an option for them

because it can lead to a narrow-minded society. To eliminate all offensive art would also

eliminate artistic expression in the gallery as well. Art is meant to be controversial. It is meant to

stir debate. I believe that freedom of expression should allow all people to express their views

and that includes art that some people may find offensive (Chiang and Richard).

As a nation, we are responsible for allowing freedom of expression protected under our

Constitution and allowing each citizen the right to express themselves without censorship or

restraint through any means. The moment some people are accorded some moral or legal

superiority to judge what constitutes good and bad art or good and evil expression, we are simply

infringing the Constitution. When we censor art, it's not just the artist who is censored, but all

others who have different viewpoints. Don't you think that this kind of narrow thinking is exactly

what our founding fathers wanted to avoid when they enacted the First Amendment? Two pieces

of work that I would like to talk about and which elicited all kind of controversy is Guerilla

Girls, Do Women have to be naked to get into the Met. Museum? 1989, and Andres Serrano, Piss

Christ, 1987. Guerilla Girls, Do Women have to be naked to get into the Met. Museum? was
 Surname 4

written by three feminist women who wanted to challenge gender and ethnic bias and corruption

in politics, art, film, and pop culture in their artwork using outrageous facts, humor, and visuals

to expose. They wanted to confront the art world's attitude toward women and their lack of

representation in art. However, the Public Art Fund (PAF) found their work “too provocative”

and rejected their work (Girls and Esther).

The other artwork that we can talk about is the photo, "Piss Christ" by Andres Serrano. It

was a photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine that generated a controversial debate on the

national and international levels regarding blasphemous actions (Serrano). The work was

displayed at the Brooklyn Museum in New York City where it caused protests from

conservatives and religious groups. They felt that the image was blasphemous (Serrano). In

addition, many people have argued that it is offensive to them for political and religious reasons.

These controversies occurred due to the differing views and opinions of others who viewed this

artwork. Many people in America believe that the work should be censored in protest of those

who hold those views and beliefs. However, this kind of censorship will only lead to a lack of

freedom and expression in our country (Chiang and Richard). These two pieces of work are

proof that freedom of expression should never be censored no matter what the views are. This is

because people are fond of labeling something controversial according to the beliefs and values

that they hold. Why should anyone impose their believes on anybody while the First Amendment

clearly guarantees all people the right chose and express themselves freely? The point I am

trying to make is that art is not just about aesthetics but also about freedom of expression and

personal expression (Chiang and Richard).

Lastly, freedom of expression should never be censored because it is important for people

to express themselves freely as well as to understand others and what they believe in. Art allows
 Surname 5

people to explore their own emotions as they interpret what they see and this can lead to new

understanding and appreciation for other cultures, beliefs, and traditions. This can also allow us

to better understand each other through our experiences in life and this will prevent us from

being too narrow minded when it comes to viewing art. This is why it should be submitted here

that there is nothing like controversial art. There is, thought provoking art, historical art, and

even critical art that raises many questions and challenges people to open their eyes and think in

a different way. There is nothing like a good old controversial piece of art and this is why

everybody who believes in freedom should strongly stand on the side of freedom of expression

for all people.

Works Cited

Chiang, Tun-Jen, and Richard A. Posner. "Censorship versus Freedom of Expression in the

Arts." Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture 1 (2006): 309-335.

Girls, Guerrilla, and Esther Newton. "Do women have to be naked to get into the Met.

Museum?." 1989 (1989).

Serrano, Andres. "Immersion (Piss Christ)." TIME 100 Photos (1987).

Tushnet, Mark. "Art and the First Amendment." Colum. JL & Arts 35 (2011): 169.