Printable View
This is just silly:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16557455/
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
This guy produces and sells his artwork on the Internet on his own time, and the school board fires him for it. Yes, his artwork is "adult" in nature, and his method of promoting it is slightly risqué, but it's basically harmless. I hope he sues the bejeezus out of the school board...
I'm more suprised by the fact that they still teach high school art classes in Chesterfield, than the fact that he got fired.
Wow, an abstract modern artist who is flakey, silly and exhibitionistic in nature, who woulda thunk it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
I love this line in the article...
Gosh, they even gave the line its own paragraph. Get it? A 'butt printing artist' who was a 'tremendous asset' got canned? See? Butt, asset. Get it? MSNBC loves an unintentional pun! Ha ha ha... :wall:Quote:
“Chesterfield lost a tremendous asset today,” he said.
I disagree, private life or not his personal assets (ahem) have become public in nature and if such matters adversely affect the workplace (especially one filled with children) then anyone can be easily canned (err) on those same grounds. All the school board needs to prove is whether Murmer's 'l'art de la derrière extraordinaire' is disruptive to the academic environment should he attempt to file a lawsuit. The fool should have thought of this before he decided to capture his anal expressionist movement on video.
On the other hand... Murmer's lukky enuff to got hisself a gummint job so it won't be too long before he'll be singin' "Show me da money!"
Read about this a while ago. I think his art is kind of lame (mostly because I am not big on abstract or flowers) but is certainly acceptable as far as art goes. I do consider it adult and think it doesn’t match well with a teacher of minors, I would let him go. If he were a college teacher/instructor/professor it would be fine, many of my college instructors created art of an adult/mature nature that would not have been appropriate for a k-12 teacher to be creating. If he didn’t think it was bad or wrong he wouldn’t have tried so hard to keep his art separate from his teaching.
With all the notoriety he is gaining from the story he shouldn’t have a problem living off his butt-printing or even landing a college teaching gig.
Picasso lives. :beatnik:Quote:
Murmer, a teacher at Monacan High School, was suspended in December after objections were raised about his private abstract artwork, much of which includes smearing his posterior and genitals with paint and pressing them against canvas.
His paintings sell for as much as $900 each on his Web site.
If he can get $900 selling copies of bollocks I am sure Bill Gates will give him a job.
You really can't make this stuff up :juggle2:
I'm not sure what I'd have done if I were in the school board. If his work remained largely unknown to the general public, there wouldn't have been a problem. I wonder if he considered the possibility that one of his students might recognize him (by name or otherwise)
So if John Irving was a high-school English teacher, we would be justified in firing him for writing Cider House Rules, or Hotel New Hampshire? Both very "adult" in nature (sex, incest, rape, abortion, infidelity, homosexuality, violence, a little bit of everything, really), but considered great American novels.Quote:
Originally Posted by yesdachi
Great American novels are not necessarily for minors. I don’t think Irving would be an ideal kids teacher either, but I would have been happy to have had him as a professor in college. There are plenty of places for adults who enjoy creating and writing adult things in their off time to work with and teach other adults during their on time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Fair comment, but my question still stands: if a high-school English teacher wrote a novel that dealt with all of those subjects and it became a huge best-seller, would the school board be justified in firing him? (Let's ignore for the moment tha fact that as soon as his book sold a million or so copies, the teacher would more than likely go and tell the school board what they could do with their lousy $40 grand/year:laugh4: )Quote:
Originally Posted by yesdachi
This guy wasn't showing his art to his students, or targeting them with his marketing. If parents are concerned with their kids viewing his material on the Internet, then maybe they should be policing their kids' Internet usage a bit more actively.
I suspect the following two excerpts from the article might have more bearing on the decision than the quality of his art, per se.
Quote:
The decision also is in keeping with court rulings that hold that teachers are expected to lead by example and be role models, she said.
Quote:
The unique approach to art became a topic when a clip showing Murmer, wearing a fake nose and glasses, a towel on his head and black thong, turned up on YouTube.com and became the talk of the high school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
I would think that an art teacher who is a successful commercial artist exercising his right to freedom of expression is an excellent role model for art students.Quote:
The decision also is in keeping with court rulings that hold that teachers are expected to lead by example and be role models, she said.
Since I've never been averse to the sound of my own voice :beam: , I'll quote myself:Quote:
The unique approach to art became a topic when a clip showing Murmer, wearing a fake nose and glasses, a towel on his head and black thong, turned up on YouTube.com and became the talk of the high school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Here's your choice:
A. Fire the whacky art teacher.
+ Stops loads of complaints from parents, puts all of the issue off on the shoulders of the Board's attorney.
- Probably a law suit will be lodged (but the attorney says you have a fair case [private behavior impacting job clause in contract] so it will either be a court win -- or enough pressure to end the issue with a reasonable settlement 'out of court').
B. Let the whacky teacher teach.
+ Champions that teachers right to free expression.
- Possible law suits from parents, voluminous complaints from parents, probable loss of position at next election (and concommitant death of future political career if you have such aspirations).
....not hard to see what happened and why.
Of course, it is possible he was not a very good teacher and the school board wanted an excuse to get rid of him. I have known similar things to happen. OK not with teachers who used their private parts instead of paint brushes but teachers who did something questionable that they would have got away with if the school had wanted to keep them, but since the school wanted rid of them, they got their marching orders.
I don't disagree. However, it appears clear that previous cases have come down on the side of a more "conservative" role model. If this is the case, he should have known better than to push boundaries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Again, I don't disagree with the sentiment. But once again, if the expectation is that teachers should present a certain level of "respectability" they should be cogniscent of activities that might get into the public domain and seen by their students. It is their responsibility to ensure this does not happen, not the students' or their parents' to avoid such an exposure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
When I had a business, it was a requirement for my teachers to wear suit and tie (private sector). This was tested in court by an employee who felt it should not apply to him. He lost, because he knew the requirements whn he applied and signed a contract of employment to that effect.
If a job requires a certain behaviour pattern and this has been upheld by case law, then one either toes the line or leaves.
Just because someone sits on a canvas and twirls doesnt mean he is an artist.
I dont understand why any bit of idiotic behavior can be justified as art.
I just blew my nose in a tissue. Would you like to hang it on your wall Goof? :laugh4:
Uh, yes but Irving didn't slather up his assets and family jewels with paint and videotape himself in the process! I suppose if Irving decided to write exclusively about the sordid little details of his personal life that involve his nether regions and paint then his school would probably have had the same reaction and been equally justified in firing him as well. Cider House Rules was a fictional novel written with the intent of illiciting much more from its readers than an acknowledgment of the author's ability to shock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Let's be clear on this, a government run institution fired Murmer because of unacceptable public behavior and its disruptive influence in the school. I'm fairly certain that video footage of him prancing about like a fool while engaging in his 'craft' is what sealed the deal for his employment. Strictly speaking this is not censorship of art or one's beliefs. Nothing is preventing Murmer from pursuing his dream of painting a rectal masterpiece but he stepped outside the boundaries of what society (or rather, his local society) deems to be acceptable behavior for a teacher and got called for it.
Furthermore society has an odd tendency to be quite tolerant when it comes to talented artists pushing or breaking the acceptable boundaries so long as they don't deal exclusively with such controversial material. Clearly Murmer shares a great deal with other modern artists in that he compensates for lack of talent and skill by indulging in shocking or controversial practices to gain the attention of the public.
Goodball, teachers need a certain level of respectability - what high school kids are going to respect a teacher who makes a fool of himself and sells paintings of his butt?Quote:
I suspect the following two excerpts from the article might have more bearing on the decision than the quality of his art, per se.
Quote:
The decision also is in keeping with court rulings that hold that teachers are expected to lead by example and be role models, she said.
Quote:
The unique approach to art became a topic when a clip showing Murmer, wearing a fake nose and glasses, a towel on his head and black thong, turned up on YouTube.com and became the talk of the high school.
If he really is a 'successful commercial artist' than he shouldn't have to worry about making a living. His attorney is an idiot, this doesn't have to do with the first amendment, which doesn't prevent other people from responding to your actions.
Well said.Quote:
Strictly speaking this is not censorship of art or one's beliefs. Nothing is preventing Murmer from pursuing his dream of painting a rectal masterpiece but he stepped outside the boundaries of what society (or rather, his local society) deems to be acceptable behavior for a teacher and got called for it.
Furthermore society has an odd tendency to be quite tolerant when it comes to talented artists pushing or breaking the acceptable boundaries so long as they don't deal exclusively with such controversial material. Clearly Murmer shares a great deal with other modern artists in that he compensates for lack of talent and skill by indulging in shocking or controversial practises to gain the attention of the public.
It can't really be said he was fired for being an artist, as what he was doing was not really art.
Crazed Rabbit
I guess it would boil down to the individual school’s decision, It seems some tolerate more unusual behavior than others, personally I would excuse both and assuming there were no other issues with them I would go out of my way to help them find a teaching position in an adult atmosphere (although I don’t think it would be an issue for the million copies sold book writer ~D )Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
I completely agree with this part. :bow:
Quote:
If parents are concerned with their kids viewing his material on the Internet, then maybe they should be policing their kids' Internet usage a bit more actively.
Hooray for attacking his "art" (quoted to represent the effect of the viewpoints in question) then proceed to trump up morality.
Protect Teh Children, eh?
As a High School Student who theoretically would be affected by the precedent, I'll exert my wrongly-assumed superiority of position over you people and declare this case to be a farce.
And none of you adults with adult ideas and adult movies can stop me from saying it. The pragmatic argument, I accept; the this-is-not-art-not-morality-not-nice-for-Teh-Kids card, though, you can trump it on my canvas.
No, that would be too small to be the kind of art you hang on your wall. But it would probably make a nice "get well" card...Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
:clown:
Haha, if that's his idea of art he can't be a very good art teacher.
I think the board was justified in their action.
The teacher is supposed to be a role model, and I don't agree with this role model.
While a successful commercial artist, does it help or hurt that his art is a bit out there? Weighing a commercial artist who uses his posterior to create art over a role model who supports and nutures, with pictures of flowers and horses and little rainbows?
There could be extenuiating circumstances, and other variables that we don't know about.
However, this information was available, and if it disrupted the classroom and or school with the result that the School Board had to talk about it,well I'm not surprised that he got sacked.
If he had done the same thing in California or New York or whatever, I don't think they would have a problem with this. In Virginia, they do.
Not everything is as set as you may like it, and this is an example where the people's elected representatives have taken steps they feel would be in their(peoples) best interests. If it weren't a problem then it wouldn't have ended up before the school board.
School is supposed to be a mature, respectful, safe, learning environment. Not some place where the English teacher writes risque novels, Art teachers aren't that tasteful, P.E. teachers are rude and very -insert something that would impact the sentence-.
People aren't always about winning the next election.
I'm reminded of a case where a friend of mine played in a band with a man who worked as a substitute teacher. Eventually, some of his students caught wind of his band and he was told to quit the band or he'd lose his job. He assumed the nomer 'Chad Sexington' as a band pseudonym and officially 'quit' the band, leaving room for 'Chad' to fill his spot. It was all very silly, but it just seems that school boards are upset about people having lives outside of their work.
As far as I'm concerned, if he didn't violate anything in a contract, he has no reason to have been fired.
Thats disqusting. I would never look at my teacher the same if I saw imprints of his penis on the internet.
Stuff on the news is always so stupid. :laugh4:
Modern art is horrible too.
Agree. Some of the stuff my teacher said went for millions look like a series of slashes of paint. Which is so intensly horrific to the eyes. Real art is old rennascience (Spelling it wrong I know 1400-1800) realistic and very nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmic
Meh, I hope this teacher will sue off the ass of this school board. :thumbsdown:
Yes, like so many aspiring modern artists he tries to compensate his lack of talent with inane provocation and obscurantism. So what? The alternative to not having a guy like this teach art is to employ someone with absolutely no ties to modern art whatsoever. Which is far worse.
If you suck as an artist you become a critic, if you really suck you become a teacher. The same holds true for music teachers, or physical education teachers. They've all failed in pursuing their true passion profesionally, yet are passionate enough about it to not let it go, so make their living teaching it.
Gah, what silly panic about some dude smearing some paint on his behind in his spare time.
Also, I think he is precisely the kind of role-model these young impressionable kids need. That is, his example shows that: if you're not ubertalented, don't pursue a career in the arts. Learn a proper trade.
Here are some of his works:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
If what what I hear he does qualifies as 'art' in his reckoning, then of course he should have been fired. He should never have been hired in the first place.
Would you want, say, an English language teacher who has the same grasp of the language as, oh I don't know, David Beckham?
Well as a HS student, and I am assuming a minor, you are not in a position to decide what is best for you, you should go back to playing with your little friends while the grown-ups talk. :laugh4: :laugh4: :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII
Actually, I would guess that the board would have been more than interested in hearing from the teacher’s students and I would guess they did and that is one of the reasons he was dismissed.
How is that the alternative? Butt painter or someone with not ties to modern art are the only options?! I had 4 different art teachers from middle school/jr high on to graduation; none of them painted with their butt or were devoid of ties to modern art. 2 were decent and well rounded one sucked and one loved teaching so much she gave some extracurricular lessons to a senior and got dismissed (it wasn’t me :sad:).Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis
What kind I say? I'm anti-social, rebellious, violent, have some pent up anger, likes his butt a little too much, needs seventy pills a day prescribed by the psychologist (OCD, ADHD,Quote:
Originally Posted by yesdachi
HIV...), and must see the counselor every Tuesday after school to solve my problems. It's only natural I'll misguidedly think I'm adult enough to decide for myself what butt painting I like.
not really. :laugh4:
In my mind, good modern art should always épater le bourgeois, that is, it should shock and awe the 'narrow-minded middle-class'.Quote:
Originally Posted by yesdachi
There are more refined ways of doing so than painting flowers with your butt. Then again, if those bourgeois have a hissyfit over it this guys art at once becomes sublime in its stupidity. Sublime, because all it takes are some buttocks in a thong to throw an entire town in an uproar.
Gah, if I were him, I'd organise a butt-inn right in front of the school, where his pupils can admire his crap and read poems of praise for every single hair on his manly arse. https://img378.imageshack.us/img378/4168/cul2gy6.gif
In fact, I would do some real butt painting right there. I would eat a lot of beans to get some diarrhea going, add some Guinness for interesting colour effects, and crap 'Ceci n'est pas merde' on a canvas.
It would fetch millions from the MoMa.
* 'Ceci n'est pas merde' - 'This is not Shite'
I would have preferred this guy to my art teacher. He actually eat up kids for having fun during his class...
No, better. 'Modern art' isn't, and I'd rather be taught, and have my kids taught about real art by someone with knowledge and talent.Quote:
So what? The alternative to not having a guy like this teach art is to employ someone with absolutely no ties to modern art whatsoever. Which is far worse.
CR
And any poetry they try to teach my kid in English class had better freakin' rhyme...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Damn Japanese and their stupid haikus...
Well you can always move to California....Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Butt painting is lameQuote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Modern art is butt painting
Modern art is lame.
-Yesdachi
There was a young man who made art
With his naughty and most private part
He said "I paint with my ass,
But I sell for big cash,
If it's not art I don't give a fart."
- the artist formerly known as Goofball
Well regardless of what the board does...this guy will not be able to work again I guarantee that, the kids will throw things at him and call him names.
How do I know? I am a high school student and have seen/been part of doing such things to teachers that.
A no one liked (we had a fat gym teacher that stole food from kids. We'd beam her on the head with a ball every time she turned around, and refuse to run or do anything)
B gave out to much work or was a class that didn't matter. (IE they used to force us to take a music class up until 7th grade, I remember the teacher getting hit by a hail of twinkies and even having a glass mirror thrown at her.)
The kids in the neighboring district poisoned their music teacher, (put some sort of cleaner like pledge in her lemonade, teacher had to go to the hospital)
They might as well force him into early retirement or fire him.