It is still an image without redeeming social or cultural value, and that is why it is not art.
Art does not have a responsibility to have redeeming social or cultural value and what is and is not art is certainly up for debate at perhaps an infinite number of levels. I get that *you* do not find value for this work and consider it harmful. I disagree.
I never said that it doesn't matter if the child is fictional or not nor did I say that the image doesn't have consequences. I said that it matters that the child is Harry Potter, that as a fannish creation, it is not meant to exist outside of fannish context. If this were a depiction of a random child with a random adult, I wouldn't find it titillating at all and might, in fact, find it incredibly offensive. If this were a depiction of two fannish characters that I'm unfamiliar with, I wouldn't find it titillating at all and might, in fact, find it incredibly offensive. Of *course* the image has consequences -- actions have consequences. I'm saying that negative consequences do not negate the value of a piece of art. A song about shooting cops may lead to someone actually following through with said action. But I can not agree that the song should not be recorded, nor can I agree that the song has no value because of the consequences associated with it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-08-03 10:23 pm (UTC)Art does not have a responsibility to have redeeming social or cultural value and what is and is not art is certainly up for debate at perhaps an infinite number of levels. I get that *you* do not find value for this work and consider it harmful. I disagree.
I never said that it doesn't matter if the child is fictional or not nor did I say that the image doesn't have consequences. I said that it matters that the child is Harry Potter, that as a fannish creation, it is not meant to exist outside of fannish context. If this were a depiction of a random child with a random adult, I wouldn't find it titillating at all and might, in fact, find it incredibly offensive. If this were a depiction of two fannish characters that I'm unfamiliar with, I wouldn't find it titillating at all and might, in fact, find it incredibly offensive. Of *course* the image has consequences -- actions have consequences. I'm saying that negative consequences do not negate the value of a piece of art. A song about shooting cops may lead to someone actually following through with said action. But I can not agree that the song should not be recorded, nor can I agree that the song has no value because of the consequences associated with it.