*Breaking News*
Thursday, April 30, 2009
In what seems to be an attempt to maintain a controversial art display, the Camelot Art Museum has spread quite the gossip (if that is the correct word). Assistant to the art director, Pansy Parkinson, contacted the newspaper late this evening and asked to speak with me directly. I took her call and was quite surprised with what she had to say. Apparently, she is under the impression that one of the two models in the nude homoerotic photographs currently up for discussion at tomorrow's meeting is a son of a city council member.
Take from this what you will. Perhaps it is an attempt to cower the city council into quietly passing the photographs along and allowing them to remain in the museum or perhaps it's just an opportunity for 15 minutes of fame.
As a side note, the only council members with sons of legal age are Robert McKerr and Jon Dravet.
5 comments:
we should not speculate stuff until we know the case well
As director of the museum, I am in no way associated with this accusation. However, if this rumor were to be true I feel that the alleged parent would agree that these photographs are indeed art. Although I have YET to discuss this issue (thanks in part to a recall and slow decision making on the council's part) I am very excited to help shed some light on the controversy at hand. In no way should the council member in question be penalized for his alleged relationship with one of the models, instead I urge the people of the community to focus on the issue of continuing to support Camelot's fine museum and help put an end to the controversy!
If this rumor is true, then I agree with Robyn in that statement that the parent of the model should not be penalized. As stated the models were both of age to be considered adults, which means they don't need their parents' permission to do anything. The parent in question probably did not know about the pictures until after the fact. Even if the parent did know about the pictures before they were released or taken then it still shouldn't matter because it is art and if people don't want to see the pictures then they don't have to look at them!
This is not art. This kind of thing belongs in a porno shop. Perhaps Mr. Valcon's business should buy this photo, but it does not belong in our museum.
Nate Felver, President, Police Benevolent Association
I don't believe that we should jump to conclusions based on an individual who is "under the impression" that this is indeed a son of one of the council members. The individuals in the photos have nothing to do with whether or not these should be allowed to remain in our museum nor should they have any relevance to our council members or the decisions they make. I think that the situation at hand is whether or not we want to put our tax dollars toward the museum as a whole. I personally do not think that these shots should be considered art and should be removed from the museum. However, I am serving as the voice of a rather large and extremely diverse campus thus, if erotic heterosexual scenes are considered to be art, then why not homosexual? And, if we are not willing to support this exhibit and deem it inappropriate, then where do we draw the line? Do we not want our children to have a beautiful museum to experience and enjoy?
Maria Neff
Student Body President
Camelot State University
Post a Comment