What limitations should be placed on photography as an art?

Question

There was an artist that had an exhibit of dead bodies and body parts..........Do you believe there should be limitations and what kind if any and why...? Is it an ethical issue?............Opinions/examples?

Answer 1

There shouldn't be limitations on art. Even if you find it offensive or distasteful. Obviously the photographer shouldn't KILL people to get images of dead people, that's already illegal. But some of the more affecting photos to come out of the Katrina aftermath had corpses in them.

Just don't look at art, TV, books, or Internet pages that offend your senses. Respect the rest of the country's right to choose what we want to expose ourselves to.

<>

Answer 2

Even disturbing art is art...things like that may shock us and disgust us but sometimes thats what it takes to make people act, just think about the reaction when people finally saw pictures of the poor souls in concentration camps during WWII...those pictures were what got people off their butts and forced them to act.

Answer 3

Any kind of art, if it is true art, has no limitations.

Answer 4

if someone was to photograph me i would want them to photograph me in a nude because it makes me feel good and i think that theirs nothing wrong with nudiety at all because its all natural to exspress ones human body to get exsposer .