January 2 | euroPART Scandal LATE last week, a news story, dateline Vienna, blew through Europe involving some highly controversial billboards that were posted as part of a public art program. Receiving some private and some public sponsorship, the project, called euroPART, has put art photography in advertising spaces since around 1992 (as far as I can tell from some quick research). What were they? One featured three models, two female, one male, engaged in a simulated sex act -- wearing masks of Queen Elizabeth, George Bush and Jacque Chirac. "President Bush" is reclined with her legs spread; a female model wearing a Queen mask is leaning in, about to make a move on the American leader; Mr. Chirac is shown taking Her Majesty doggie style. The Queen is an interesting subject, given that she's not supposed to be involved in anything; she is the obvious surrogate for Tony Blair. There are several images like this, including one of the three of them playing in a hot tub. Another, in an entirely different visual style, depicts a woman wearing a bikini bottom with a European Union flag (blue field, 13 yellow stars in a circle, reminiscent of the one made by Betsy Ross's personal assistant) laying luxuriously and quite invitingly with her legs spread. These images then made their appearance all over Vienna, mingled through the cityscape with the usual fashion ads, about three days before Austria was about to take over the EU presidency for a year, "marring" this otherwise meaningless event. Now I know what you're thinking: of course I would think that's funny. Yes -- I'd say this is political satire verging on transcendent brilliance, the more so for having got it into public, with extra points for timing and using public funding. My favorite television scene was a usually calm and gentlemanly BBC World anchor interviewing a member of the jury (artist selection panel) that chose the works (among about 10 other series this year). I heard the live phone interview, which was later edited down to a few seconds for rebroadcast. Basically, the BBC guy put it to his interview subject in the tone of: This is inexcusable. You owe the world an explanation, start talking. To which the guy launched into a kind of lengthy art theory diatribe about how the images all "define space" and how Europe is a space that's going through big changes and this is a historical moment and the art work is a commentary on this changing space of the European Union and it's all very conceptual and legitimate... The anchor guy cuts him off: "Yes, but what has that got to do with group sex?" Ya, I nearly fell off the chair. Just the context: on primetime BBC World. With kids watching, and all. Hearing about group sex for the first time, on the evening news. The news anchor was incredulous, in full reflex mode; it looked like smoke was coming out of his collar and he might soon need a cardiologist. Taking the approximate tone of a schoolmaster, he tried to engage the guy in debate, but the art jury panelist just stuck to his story, but conceded that yes, they would take down two of the more offending pieces. Despite this, again and again, he and many other newscasters had to describe the images in words, since they had to say something, and explain what the controversy was or there's no story; and could not actually show them without a lot of Photoshop fuzz superimposed. Furthermore, they were duty bound to say something; they had to report the story. To hear them repeatedly describing "The Queen, American President Bush and French President Chirac engaging in simulated sexual activity in a hot tub" pretty much demonstrated that, at the end of the day, censorship helps the cause, but I wonder if they figured out they had been duped. Austrian politicians and others were shown (as requisite) denouncing the whole thing as sexist (it was, mysteriously, somehow not demeaning to men to show "President Bush" so compromised and submissive; apparently nothing is demeaning to men), all while the point of the photo series went unacknowledged and nobody ever mentioned that it was all a joke. The point being: these "statesmen" (as they were repeatedly referred to) are frauds (they are wearing masks, we don't even know who they are), and they are just frolicking around, and we call it history while much of the world is in flames. And hey a dozen car bombs went off in Iraq today, here are the perpetrators, and somehow THIS is offensive, everyone cares so much! Pay attention! Here is a bit of visual for you, but please don't let your dog see. http://www.planetwaves.net/contents/bush_pics.html     or http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=41