Top

blog

Stories

 

Nude Portrait Vandalized Outside White Flag Projects Art Gallery

Categories: Arts, Crime

White_Flag_Projects_vandalism.jpg
Courtesy White Flags Projects
No butts about it.
Someone out there in St. Louis is working really hard to cover our asses.

White Flag Projects founder and director Matthew Strauss says he arrived at 10 a.m. yesterday morning to discover someone had vandalized a large print hanging outside the gallery (4568 Manchester Avenue, 314-531-3442). The image is a promotion for the art nonprofit's current photography exhibit, Coconut Water.

"It's an unpleasant reminder of what you're up against sometimes with this kind of thing," Strauss sighs.

See also:
-Total Exhibitionist: Matthew Strauss has audacious plans to remake the city's art scene

The print has only been hanging for a couple of days and is an adaptation of a photograph entitled Zachary by Ryan McGinley, a renowned New York City-based photographer whose work often features nudes, at times in surreal settings (check out more of his work here).

However, someone who was roaming the Grove neighborhood early yesterday turned vigilante censor. The vandal covered the model's nether regions -- or "side butt" as Strauss calls it -- with a roller and some white paint.

"It's not like it's full-frontal male nudity," says Strauss. "It's a very classically composed portrait by internationally recognized artist."

Click through for more photos and the response of the artist.

My Voice Nation Help
28 comments
ridoe01
ridoe01

if its out in the open where it cant be avoided and within a child's view, then i can understand the act.

PJ Mitchell Rulo
PJ Mitchell Rulo

obviously! it's called indecent exposure.don't think no one get's into trouble just because they are taking nude art photo's outdoors.and there is a fine line to what can be seen in public with displaying photo's.no different than people in magazines..

Emma Eich
Emma Eich

It's not inappropriate!! It's art and its not hurting anyone so why vandalize it? Makes no sense

Lossy Dreamsequence
Lossy Dreamsequence

Def looks like a guy taking a dump, lol. Gross! Guess I don't appreciate art.

PJ Mitchell Rulo
PJ Mitchell Rulo

it would have only been inappropriate if the private area was shown.that then would have been a little too much for younger eye's.i see that picture being no different than someone being in a bathing suite out in public.I think a body of anyone's is a beautiful work of art and obviously one of a kind.i mean come on adam and eve only wore leaves.

Brian Boyd
Brian Boyd

Its inappropriate because it sucks not because of the nudity. It's not like you can see its junk.

Kelly Kaufmann
Kelly Kaufmann

Question: We have nudity laws. Should public art be able to bypass nudity laws (yes I know it' art of a human and not a human, but still it is a question!)? Would a nude person get arrested if they were in this position outside?

Sharon Walker
Sharon Walker

No it is not inappropriate at all. I love living in St. Louis because we have so much art and culture here. Apparently, we have some who do not appreciate it as much as most others do.

Bambi Zj Baker
Bambi Zj Baker

Not inappropriate but the guy looks like he could use a good meal

Jimmy Pecoraro
Jimmy Pecoraro

Def not art, lazy art at best. Get some clothes on, dang. Knowbody needs to see that especially children.

Mark Harris
Mark Harris

I wouldn't call it art, but I don't think it's inappropriate...

Steven Ley
Steven Ley

I'm glad the artist requested that it remain hanging as is. It's transformed from pure classical art to stl social commentary.

Lauren M Brace
Lauren M Brace

They've clearly not been to the art museum in a while. Those famous paintings that our city holds dear are way more indecent than this. You have to think that the vandal is probably completely disconnected with their own body if they can't look at the benign parts of another's

Betsy Strelinger
Betsy Strelinger

I also drive past it every day, and don't find inappropriate, either. In fact, I was disappointed that the vandalism occurred. Of all the images that White Flag Projects has presented in that location, I find it humorous that THIS is the one that got vandalized.

Paul Huber
Paul Huber

I drive past that image on my way to work and don't find it inappropriate at all

Steven Simpson-Black
Steven Simpson-Black

America: where we value so-called "decency," even if it means vandalism.

JamesMadison
JamesMadison topcommenter

@ridoe01 , what is harmful to a child to see the side of a young man? No genitals. No anus. Not even a hint of either. Just the side of a person.


btw, the Art Museum has topless women sitting outside of it. Should someone take a hammer and chisel to those statues?

JamesMadison
JamesMadison topcommenter

@PJ Mitchell Rulo , would you allow the side of a woman's hip to be seen? That is all that is being shown. If you start censoring parts of the body that are not genitals or the anus, then we will soon be seen in burkas.

JamesMadison
JamesMadison topcommenter

@Lossy Dreamsequence , I do not care for the image itself. It is lacking much to my eye, but whatever the artist wanted to say, he has the right to express it. I do agree a more fitting vandalism would have been to paint a roll of toilet paper in his hand - not that I agree with vandalism, but it would have been funnier.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...