inspiration from Artists Week 35 , Peder Mork Monsted and Richard Thorn.

Afraid there won’t be any of Beardsley’s ‘splendidly filthy’ work in the write up on him next week - people can search for that themselves!  Don’t think filthy is the right description for it, though - it’s certainly erotic, but it’s also beautifully drawn and often quite comical.

Well, clearly one wasn't being entirely serious - it's actually quite a complicated subject: in more liberal moments, I claim not to be bothered by pornography; but it's not really true, and if I saw it here I'd think it horribly out of place.  Beardsley though: I think his work is of a piece - and I wouldn't be at all troubled to see even the most extreme examples of it; its purpose and intent was not primarily sexual - though certainly partly so; some of those drawings were not conceived in an austere imagination born of cool analysis. There are studies by Rembrandt, Turner, Redon, Fuseli, Fragonard, Boucher - the last two leaving one in no doubt at all about the meaning, but not explicit; the first four being, actually, QUITE explicit; I had a book entitled (I think) The Erotic Arts, featuring an explicitly phallic sculpture by Brancusi on the front cover (incidentally: I sold if for quite a lot of money .... there's no doubt that sex sells).  There was little or nothing in that book which I should be in any way disturbed to see here.   I have - fairly obviouly - also seen pornography as well: which was anything but erotic but actually in no sense more explicit. It fascinates me where we draw the line or what that line is - as it happens, I have a strong dislike of art purely intended to be erotic, but hiding all the functioning bits, or at least leaving them not actually functioning, untroubled by any other subject's attentions: hard to explain ... but I think a loathing of the coy and twee lies at the heart of it.  If you're going to show sexual imagery, then take a leaf out of the Kama Sutra, not out of a 1960's version of Razzle or Playboy magazine or a Page Three Stunna from The Sun.  Be, basically, honest about it - as Beardsley was; some of those artists I mentioned earlier less so, as their sexually explicit work was furtively commissioned and privately published.  The French artists would have got into serious trouble with the Catholic Church had it been otherwise. But there we are.  I am not inviting a flood of lascivious imagery - we had more than enough of that with one of the Viagra spams.  It was the Metropolitan Police which, for a time, had a nervously-twitching obsession with filf-n-smut, closing down exhibitions of "obscene" pictures, in their view: and satirized by the late Jake Thackeray in the line "I don't get it so it must be vile".  That was the era of Mrs Whitehouse, Lord Longford, and Cliff Richard, plus the Obscene Publications Squad - insofar as Whitehouse was trying to protect children, I'm not entirely without sympathy for her: but those people did say some extraordinarily stupid things - and they all look a bit desperate now to hold back a wave of increasing popular sentiment, which they thought depraved. Why does this matter at all?  Because - apart from matters aesthetic - much the same is going on in, eg, Iran right now: the authorities try to hold up the walls of a cracked dam: and sooner or later are engulfed by more and worse than they ever envisaged.  In short - I should be inclined to show Beardsley red in tooth and claw, but I quite understand that doing so might not be appreciated. 

Aubrey Beardsley was an English illustrator and writer known for his distinctive and often provocative black-and-white illustrations, many of which were created in the late nineteenth century. One of his famous works is a set of illustrations for Oscar Wilde's play Salome, characterized by a complex, ornate, and often decadent style. How do you feel about the virtual world? I want to play in online casinos, interested in https://casinosanalyzer.com/online-casinos/ethiopian-birr-etb information on casinos, can I trust them? Regarding Thorne's work, I can't identify the specific artist or piece you are referring to, as there may be several artists with the name "Thorne" and works associated with that name. If you could provide more information, I would be happy to discuss Thorne's work further.