The inner thoughts of a person are constricted and covet. To find some one who

has a talent to express themselves in accuracy is rare. Although some expressions are

unpleasant censoring the material that is created is denying the artist their thoughts.

Michael Diana is a precise example of this.

Michael Diana was a median to the dark side starting as a child. As time

progressed he found that using a comic book set up to show his art was appropriate. His

art was obscene and graphic. Although not pleasing to the eye his art work was showing

social injustices. Priests were caught rapping young boys so he drew a brutal picture of

the act. The art is describing but true. The boys were rapped and Michael expressed it

the way he felt towards it. I feel that his art was good for the prudish people who can't

believe that professors of God would do the crime.

Michaels art was found by a police officer and over time the result was charged

with obscenity. He was tried and found guilty. They out his work to the Miller test

which is the definition in legal terms of obscenity. The basic must lack literary, political,

artistic and scientific value. The political value is found by showing his opinions on acts

that have happened in society and it is artistic because he is expressing himself. The

other part of the definition is that it shows shameful, lustful or prurient interest in sex. I

don't feel that he is showing an interest in sex from the work he has shown. He is

showing the injustices. The injustices are murder and sex crimes so they include

sexuality in them.

Censorship is wrong because it puts limitations on what we are allowed to think

and put into ink. We shouldn't be limited in how and what we express. People have the

choice to look at art or read literature. If they happen to see something they aren't

agreeable with don't read anymore or look again. I think people need to be shocked at

the horrors in life.

Also with censorship all Michael Diana has to do to make this legal is put in a

crummy article. I don't feel he should have to do that because his work would then be

classified with pornography and his comic books aren't on the local drugstore shelves.

Over all I find Michael interesting and unique. His art is shocking and I need a

good shock every once in awhile. He makes the crimes portrayed very vivid and real. It

makes me ill and I want to make sure it never happens again. Although I am a minority

with this opinion I think that others are to paranoid to admit to themselves the relevancy

of the Michael Dianas comics.