[Poll] Should highly biased art be placed in government buildings

In summary: No. It would be impossible to display artwork that no one would find offensive, but it is possible to display artwork that would be neutral for the vast majority of the population. The examples you give are clearly biased and I would not want to see either if I went to a post office, courthouse or city hall.

Should highly partisan artwork be displayed?

  • Yes, partisan artwork should be displayed in government buildings

    Votes: 4 33.3%

  • No, partisan artwork does not belong in government buildings

    Votes: 8 66.7%
  • Total voters
    12
  • #1
Pengwuino
Gold Member
5,123
20
[Poll] Should highly biased art be placed in US government buildings

So what do you think? Should partisan artwork be allowed in government buildings such as court houses, libraries, and the DMV (or as its more popularly known as, hell).

And to clarify, artwork that would be considered a form of protest if displayed out during a rally/march; not a historic piece of art or informative or anything like that that isn't meant to bring out any 'outrage'.

Furthermore, this is with the US government, laws, and constitution in mind.

*EDIT*

Dang it, i didnt think id have to explain what partisan artwork would be but here goes. For examples!

1) A donkey with the word "Democrat" on it expelling urine onto the US Constitution

2) An elephant with the word "Republican" on it expelling urine onto the US Constitution

And why are foreigners voting in this poll... if a mod could reset it, clarify US only in the title and poll name, and turn it public, I would appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Art is a matter of perception...to some people a symbol of the ten commandments is outrageous...and yet that is symbolic of Americas puritan roots.
 
  • #3
What is an example of partisan artwork? I can't really think of any piece of art that I've seen used in a protest, so I can't picture what you're talking about. Do you have a jpeg of an example?
 
  • #4
just vote yes.
 
  • #5
Dang i wish i could reset this thread...
 
  • #6
All the VA hospitals and clinics I've seen have portraits of Bush and Rumsfield. Is that partisan artwork?
 
  • #7
selfAdjoint said:
All the VA hospitals and clinics I've seen have portraits of Bush and Rumsfield. Is that partisan artwork?

No. It only makes sense to have the current President's picture and the current Secretary of Defense in a VA hospital. Come on people, use logic :D

Its like having the Chief justice's picture hanging in a federal courthouse or the secretary of agricultures picture hanging in an ag-related .. government... building... sorry i can't figure out a specific example there.
 
  • #8
Pengwuino said:
No. It only makes sense to have the current President's picture and the current Secretary of Defense in a VA hospital. Come on people, use logic :D
:confused: They don't have Paul Martin's picture in my local VA hospital... I doubt most of the people there even know who our minister of defence is (does Canada have a minister of defence? does the position exist?)
 
  • #9
does Canada have a military?

juuuuuuuuust kidding :P lighten up... stop cussing at me :( *cries for his mommy*!
 
  • #10
Pengwuino said:
does Canada have a military?

juuuuuuuuust kidding :P lighten up... stop cussing at me :( *cries for his mommy*!
STOP READING MY MIND!
 
  • #11
Pengwuino said:
And why are foreigners voting in this poll... if a mod could reset it, clarify US only in the title and poll name, and turn it public, I would appreciate it.
Ummm ... 'Cuz you didn't specify US government in the original poll!?

So Sollee :biggrin: <- Looks Chinese doesn't he?
 
  • #12
Never!

Gimme a hug :D Ewww not that kinda hug... gosh your a pervert... yah i think the economy is too dependant on high tech jobs...
 
  • #13
The Smoking Man said:
Ummm ... 'Cuz you didn't specify US government in the original poll!?

So Sollee :biggrin: <- Looks Chinese doesn't he?

Oh right...

[Poll] Should highly biased art be placed in US government buildings
 
  • #14
selfAdjoint said:
All the VA hospitals and clinics I've seen have portraits of Bush and Rumsfield. Is that partisan artwork?
No ... cruel and unusual punishment.
 
  • #15
Based on your examples of partisan artwork I would have to vote no. Although depends on what you mean by government buildings. Would there be a difference for a courthouse and an art exhibit at a school? I am assuming the latter would be exempt.

It would be impossible to display artwork that no one would find offensive, but it is possible to display artwork that would be neutral for the vast majority of the population. The examples you give are clearly biased and I would not want to see either if I went to a post office, courthouse or city hall. A liberal judge has no more a right to hang a picture depicting Bush as a nazi as a conservative one would have to hang (hmmmmmm) a gay couple in front of a firing squad?
 
  • #16
haha oh man i shoudl have just said "can this picture of clinton shaking hands with the devil be allowed in a federal court house hallway" or something like that that is obviously partisan and obviously in a government building.
 
  • #17
Pengwuino said:
haha oh man i shoudl have just said "can this picture of clinton shaking hands with the devil be allowed in a federal court house hallway" or something like that that is obviously partisan and obviously in a government building.


Well, hindsight is 20/20 :biggrin:
 
  • #18
Pengwuino said:
haha oh man i shoudl have just said "can this picture of clinton shaking hands with the devil be allowed in a federal court house hallway" or something like that that is obviously partisan and obviously in a government building.

I don't think there has ever been such a case, has there?
 
  • #19
Townsend said:
I don't think there has ever been such a case, has there?

I doubt it but that would be much clearer as to what I am talking about haha
 
  • #20
Well, none the examples you gave would I consider to be art. So I think your questiuon is moot.

What is your real motivation for starting this thread?

Could you provide an actual example of a piece of partisan art that has offended you?
 
  • #21
Townsend said:
haha oh man i shoudl have just said "can this picture of clinton shaking hands with the devil be allowed in a federal court house hallway" or something like that that is obviously partisan and obviously in a government building.

I don't think there has ever been such a case, has there?

What do you mean? a poster of clinton shaking hands with the devil?? or real clinton shaking hands with the devil??

I have one of rumsfeld shaking hands with the devil... :wink:
 
  • #22
Pengwuino said:
No. It only makes sense to have the current President's picture and the current Secretary of Defense in a VA hospital. Come on people, use logic :D

How about this picture of Donald Rumsfeld at the VA hospital?

http://hnn.us/articles/1283.html

Would you consider it partisan art?
 

Attachments

  • saddam_rummy.jpg
    saddam_rummy.jpg
    14.6 KB · Views: 531
  • #23
Not in hallways or reception areas, or anything public. In someone's office, they can do whatever they want. It just causes issues that need not be wasting government time and money. But defining what is acceptable, and fighting to get the unnacceptable out wastes time and money too, so it's a bit of a darned if you do, darned if you don't thing.
 
  • #24
Just do what hotels do. Nothing but water-color paintings of sailboats and beaches. In addition, go ahread and include photo-busts of the men in charge. No possibility of controversy or disruption.
 
  • #25
My favorite piece of partisan art is at my gay brother in law's apartment. It's a picture from when he was an aide of some sort in DC. It's a picture of Bush Senior warmly arm in arm with him, grinning at the camera.

My bil has this picture somewhat prominently displayed. I laugh every time I see it. I love it. I don't know why, don't read too much into it, I just love it.

I voted no.
 
  • #26
pattylou said:
My favorite piece of partisan art is at my gay brother in law's apartment. It's a picture from when he was an aide of some sort in DC. It's a picture of Bush Senior warmly arm in arm with him, grinning at the camera.

My bil has this picture somewhat prominently displayed. I laugh every time I see it. I love it. I don't know why, don't read too much into it, I just love it.

I voted no.
You'll love this then: http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushstayscrawford.htm

Now, really, I think we have lost the plot on this question.

There is a big difference between putting the 10 commandments or Christ on the cross on the wall and political cartoons.

loseyourname has the right answer... Even black velvet pictures of Elvis or Dogs playing Poker would be good for people of them 'southern states'. :biggrin:
 
  • #28
pattylou said:
:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:

There's something about that family...
Actually, the funniest one I saw was a scan of a newspaper article in banning gay marriage however there was an unrelated story beside it that contained a reference to Bush and Prince Bandar which they chose to illustrate with a photo of them walking together hand in hand.

I was searching for that one to link to here but couldn't find it immediately.

I am sure someone will post it soon.
 
  • #29
The Smoking Man said:
Even black velvet pictures of Elvis or Dogs playing Poker would be good for people of them 'southern states'. :biggrin:

Why can't those people decide what is good for them, themselves? Do you seriously believe they should have the benevolence of you or anyone else to decide for them? Such despotism that would be…. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
  • #30
And why are foreigners voting in this poll

Actually you are the foreigner! :smile:
 
  • #31
Townsend said:
Why can't those people decide what is good for them, themselves? Do you seriously believe they should have the benevolence of you or anyone else to decide for them? Such despotism that would be…. :rolleyes:
Okay then ... they can have the black velvet bullfighter with the matching pillows but don't say I didn't warn you.
 
  • #32
The Smoking Man said:
Okay then ... they can have the black velvet bullfighter with the matching pillows but don't say I didn't warn you.

Ok...you have my word that I will never say you didn't warn me... :smile:
 

FAQ: [Poll] Should highly biased art be placed in government buildings

Should government buildings display highly biased art?

The answer to this question depends on the purpose and function of the government building. If the building serves as a space for public debate and discussion, then displaying highly biased art may be appropriate as it can stimulate critical thinking and dialogue. However, if the building serves as a neutral space for government operations, then displaying highly biased art may be seen as inappropriate and potentially divisive.

What is considered "highly biased" art?

Highly biased art refers to artwork that promotes a specific viewpoint or ideology, often in a one-sided or extreme manner. This can include political propaganda, hate speech, or artwork that promotes discrimination or exclusion of certain groups.

Who decides what is considered "highly biased" art?

The determination of what is considered "highly biased" art can be subjective and may vary depending on individual opinions and perspectives. However, in a government setting, it is typically the responsibility of a committee or board to review and approve artwork for display in government buildings. They may use guidelines or criteria to assess the level of bias in the artwork.

What are the potential consequences of displaying highly biased art in government buildings?

Displaying highly biased art in government buildings can have various consequences, including creating a divisive or hostile environment, promoting discrimination or exclusion of certain groups, and damaging the reputation and credibility of the government. It may also lead to backlash and protests from the public.

Are there any benefits to displaying highly biased art in government buildings?

While there may be some potential benefits, such as stimulating critical thinking and dialogue, the potential negative consequences of displaying highly biased art in government buildings outweigh any potential benefits. It is important for government buildings to maintain a neutral and inclusive environment for all individuals.

Similar threads

News Is a Major Overhaul of the US Government Possible? Feedback Wanted!
Replies
11
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top