Forum - View topic

INTEREST: Controversial Artist Rokudenashiko Found Guilty on Obscenity Charge

This is why I detest modern art, it is just made for the sake of being controversial. Why would you do something like this? there is merit to it, it is just shocking for the sack of being chocking.

This is why I detest modern art, it is just made for the sake of being controversial. Why would you do something like this? there is merit to it, it is just shocking for the sack of being chocking.

*sigh* well this happened free speech takes it on the chin hopeful this may get overturned in Appeal but I doubt it. Of course than the more meta-textual question is "is this art?" and "what is art?" If I pour water into a box and call it art does that make it art?

The issue of obscenity to the side I don't think this has to be considered art in order to be defended as free speech although I think it is art I always wonder about the definitions of Art people have when things like this come up.

David was a statue of person, who was naked. It wasn't just a penis. Her work was just her vagina, and the way she titles her work she is clearly trying to be controversial, not making anything meaningful.

MarshalBanana wrote:

This is why I detest modern art, it is just made for the sake of being controversial. Why would you do something like this? there is merit to it, it is just shocking for the sack of being chocking.

That's a stereotype borne out of artists here and there who try to be controversial, though they do so for different reasons (and not always out of attention). They're the ones getting the mainstream attention. The only controversy in stuff like "Super Cloud Bros." (a copy of Super Mario Bros. with everything removed but the sky), "Your Life Could Be Just a Chair of Bowlies" (a chair made of glued-together ceramic bowls), or that bicycle-powered waterwheel is the controversy you, the viewer, insert into it.

(Also depends on what you mean by "modern." I take it you mean art made recently and not the Modernist art movement spearheaded by guys like Marcel Duchamp.)

Parsifal24 wrote:

*sigh* well this happened free speech takes it on the chin hopeful this may get overturned in Appeal but I doubt it. Of course than the more meta-textual question is "is this art?" and "what is art?" If I pour water into a box and call it art does that make it art? The issue of obscenity to the side I don't think this has to be considered art in order to be defended as free speech although I think it is art I always wonder about the definitions of Art people have when things like this come up.

Art is so varied that the only definition I can come up with that links all of it together is that it was declared art by someone who calls him- or herself an artist. There was that one piece, for instance--what was it called again? "17' 42"" or something like that--where the artist gathered an audience, sat in front of a piano looking ready to play, and just sat there for the duration without playing anything while recording the audience.

MarshalBanana wrote:

David was a statue of person, who was naked. It wasn't just a penis. Her work was just her vagina, and the way she titles her work she is clearly trying to be controversial, not making anything meaningful.

My brief experience in art criticism tells me she did this to criticize the Japanese government directly, their response being not only expected but a part of this work. (Looks like other people have explained this in more detail than I have.) She married a westerner. She can easily move out of Japan and to a country that's more tolerant about vaginas if she needed to. But she hasn't, and I believe that's because she wants to send a message to the Japanese people about the Japanese government to show how ridiculous their behavior and how ridiculous Japanese culture is, and the message is lost if she moves out.

But an art critic can find meaning out of anything.

I need me some of that so called ridiculous Japanese culture at least with the laws they have keeps their society in check,Japan is one of the safest countries in Asia with the lowest crime rate in the world and if silly so called ridiculous rules as westerners called it contributes to their ranks well so be it,I'm from Trinidad and the way how anything goes in my country i would be glad to have some of the rules,laws and ridiculous culture that they have

You can call it whatever you want, art or otherwise, either way it's inherently in poor taste and people have the right to express how they feel about it. Art, good or bad, is not free from criticism, and 'free speech' as those idiots who conveniently preach in her defense, also applies to its naysayers.

I need me some of that so called ridiculous Japanese culture at least with the laws they have keeps their society in check,Japan is one of the safest countries in Asia with the lowest crime rate in the world and if silly so called ridiculous rules as westerners called it contributes to their ranks well so be it,I'm from Trinidad and the way how anything goes in my country i would be glad to have some of the rules,laws and ridiculous culture that they have

hack5 wrote:

I need me some of that so called ridiculous Japanese culture at least with the laws they have keeps their society in check,Japan is one of the safest countries in Asia with the lowest crime rate in the world and if silly so called ridiculous rules as westerners called it contributes to their ranks well so be it,I'm from Trinidad and the way how anything goes in my country i would be glad to have some of the rules,laws and ridiculous culture that they have

Japan is safe for a lot of various reasons and none of them have to do with the fact that they think vaginas and penises are obscene. Ugh, just writing that makes me want to puke.

Topgunguy wrote:

You can call it whatever you want, art or otherwise, either way it's inherently in poor taste and people have the right to express how they feel about it. Art, good or bad, is not free from criticism, and 'free speech' as those idiots who conveniently preach in her defense, also applies to its naysayers.

This isn't about the criticism she's receiving, it's about legitimate political action being taken against her for simply making a statement about Japan's ridiculous obscenity laws.

hack5 wrote:

I need me some of that so called ridiculous Japanese culture at least with the laws they have keeps their society in check,Japan is one of the safest countries in Asia with the lowest crime rate in the world and if silly so called ridiculous rules as westerners called it contributes to their ranks well so be it,I'm from Trinidad and the way how anything goes in my country i would be glad to have some of the rules,laws and ridiculous culture that they have

Safety and obscenity have nothing to do with each other. She's not criticizing the Japanese government and culture for its stances on safety at all, but for its heavy-handed rules on obscenity.

very common purpose of art (not that it needs a purpose) is political commentary. Surely the fact that her work provokes this kind of response, and the discussions that ensue from that, counts as meaningful? Why does something lose value to you if it's intentionally provocative?

After reading the forum I pity those who use western values as a means to decry eastern as if they're views and morals are superior to others in every way. Maybe some, but everyone has their ups and downs, and no one has good up to down ratio

Just Saiyan.

you haven't seen much modern art. Yes, some of it is intended to be controversial, but a majority that I've seen is not. Some of it I've liked, such as a giant sculpture of a head made out of corrugated cardboard, and some I detest, like, white square on white. Modern art can be very inaccessible to people who don't devote a lot of time to it, but there's other mediums with the same problem of requiring a lot of knowledge to fully appreciate it..

it is overly perverted aspect of it, she didn't push the boat out or challenge anything, she just did something very fu*cked up. The people in the comments complaining about how the country is handling this, but I'm sure any western county with morals would also done something about it.

Mannichiwa, America!

I am MANKO (vagina) artist Rokudenashiko (Megumi Igarashi).

Rokudenashi means "useless" or "good-for-nothing" in Japanese.
Japanese mangaka make silly pen names for themselves all the time, so I made myself this silly pen name without much to it when I started my career in "reality manga." Manko art, as it happens, was also just a silly thing I did for the story.

However, I was totally unprepared for the reaction of men in Japan.
"It's dirty!" "It's gross!" "It's probably smelly," they spewed at me.
Others would leer at me:
"Show me more!" "You perverted little girl!" "Let me f*** you."

There is something wrong when what amounts to an organ in everyone assigned female at birth is approached with such an overdetermined derision or special treatment. Come to think of it, even the utterance of "manko" was a taboo, and absolutely forbidden since I was a child, and I found myself respecting the archaic convention against saying it, even despite myself.

Since I've started my work in Manko art, I've been fighting back against the old men who complain about it. I've decided to keep making even more ridiculous work, with all seriousness. Though this was kind of a joke at first, now I'm joking around with every ounce of my body and soul.

My ideas has infuriated a bunch of small-minded men, but the number of people who think it's fun, silly, happy, and hilarious have also grown."

And I can't think of a single Western country that would throw her in jail for it. Course there's Russia, but they're not really in line with the rest of the Western world.