SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : FLAME THREAD - Post all obnoxious/derogatory comments here
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rainy_Day_Woman who wrote (12666)2/4/2004 2:47:40 PM
From: Druss  Read Replies (1) of 12754
 
Foxlette--I am not so crass as to post pornographic photos all over my house on every available surface. Not to mention there is no room what with my other art collections--the velvet Elvis's and all. Because of the volume I store my more vivid stuff in a warehouse.
That brings up a question no one has asked about Janet Jackson's boobie exposure; was it art? Did we see Janet join the ranks of artists with this boobie display. Certainly her tinny voiced caterwauling never qualified her.
I am uncertain on the question myself. I would say she is not the artist that her brother Micheal is. It will take some doing to match his grabbing his groin area on stage and surgically turning his face into a Kabuki theater mask. But still was it art, perhaps even great art? Perhaps it was one of those transitional moments where we will look back and say: "It was Janet Jackson who really brought the fine art of boobies to the previously vast wasteland of television." What do you think?
Druss
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News