Was this a case of censorship or discrimination against the medium of photography as art?
Mistlin Gallery has a show going on called Figuratively Speaking. Knowing that they were about to hang a show called, Figuratively Speaking, why wasn't there a board meeting to go over the excepted artworks before they were hung? And how can a few people who don't happen to like one or two of the images be allowed the power to have them removed, once they were hung? Art will never appeal to everyone. Someone will always be there to disapprove of any given piece of art. The show was call, Figuratively Speaking. There are nude images that were not removed yet are more explicit in their content than the photographs that were removed.
Nude images NOT REMOVED from the show:
http://picasaweb.google.com/SpeakingFiguratively [1]
Nude images REMOVED:
http://www.modbee.com/2064/gallery/144035.html [2] (after being excepted by a jury)
In my opinion the only difference in explicitness is the medium used. So, is it censorship or discrimination? Photographs were the only medium removed from the show. And the show passed through an appointed Jury that is well versed in the Arts!