Bart art critics nix nudity in posters for casanova show – san francisco chronicle cocktail whisky angostura bitters

Although the ladies’ breasts look innocent, cotton-candy-like, in fact; although the cherubs are so fleshy that anything naughty has disappeared into the hills and valleys; and although the statue is, well, a sexless classic, four black bars have been placed over what someone must have deemed offending parts.

BART spokeswoman anna duckworth (yes, she used to be a TV reporter) confirmed that the original version of the poster, as submitted, pictured those parts. But BART does have its guidelines. What’s not allowed: an ad that “contains obscene material or images of nudity. For purposes of these guidelines, the term ‘obscene matter’ shall have the meaning set forth in the california penal code section 311.”

parts BART

The state defines “obscene matter” as that which, “applying contemporary statewide standards, appeals to the prurient interest, that, taken as a whole, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and that, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” it would seem the display of the painting in the casanova exhibition would demonstrate its artistic value.


But the definition also specifies that “obscene matter” may have to do with the depiction of “persons under the age of 16 years engaged in sexual conduct.”

Does cavorting qualify as being “engaged in sexual conduct”? And what’s the age range of cherubs? Do they qualify for discounts on public transportation? (that’s probably an irrelevant question.)

taken whole

Anyway, it seems to have been those darned cherubs that rained on tieopolo’s parade. BART censors sent back the ad for adjustments, and the black lines were added.

•with sunshine alternating with downpours, lisa saunders turned to the chronicle’s weather page on thursday, march 22, for a prediction of what was to come, and found: “rain will be heavy at times, especially during any storms.”

•the westside observer, a monthly publication that covers the outside lands festival, has apologized for the photo of bare-chested scott wiener that ran in its march issue with a story about wiener’s state senate bill allowing the relaxation of height limits near stops for public transit. Critics thought the photo, taken at the folsom street fair, deliberately homophobic, intended to paint wiener as somehow separate from the neighborhood folks who read the monthly.Sexual conduct

Observer publisher mitch bull told the bay area reporter’s matthew bajko that it was “a poor decision.” (I’m thinking of the famous aaron peskin speedo pics and wondering whether funds for charity could be raised with a calendar featuring photos of partially nude politicians.)

•four golfers from las vegas were playing at the olympic club, reports gino, the bartender at sharp park golf course, when they got into an argument. One of them was so angry that he left the game. “that’s why we bring our own planes,” said one of the remaining threesome.

“sleeping with our dogs is good for the relationship, unless it’s not. By that, I mean if sleeping with your dog works for you and you like it, it’s probably a good thing to do.” this wisdom is from animal behaviorist karen london’s bark magazine essay on canine sleep.“obscene matter”

Pet-less readers should feel free to apply london’s observations to mates, simply substituting the word “mate” for “dog.” dog owners will note, however, that london’s answer is a waffle.

Among her more definite observations, however, is that a dog who has had a bad day — being tied up or stared at, for example, constitutes a bad day for a dog — sleeps less well than a dog who has spent the day in a series of playdates or has nutrition opportunities that involve greasy bones. “if a dog has had a bad day, a night of poor sleep is a real possibility,” as is the dog’s tiredness and irritability the next day, london writes.