I've recently returned from a holiday in Florence, somewhere I'd been wanting to visit since reading a book on the renaissance and the remarkable Florentine geniuses who gave us the modern world.

I admit that I'd been aware that a couple of the great artists, such as Donatello and Leonardo, were guilty of some rather sordid sexual perversions, but walking around the Galleria Academia, a virtual temple to paedophillia that Michael Jackson would have been envious of, I had to really confront the fact that western civilisation was built almost entirely by paedos...TWICE! The first time, of course, by the Greeks, and then the Florentines 2,000 years later.

Now, I despise the paedos as much as anyone and would quite happily kill each and every one of them with my own hands, but my trip to Florence did shake me up a bit. Firstly, how do you come to terms with the fact that the civilisation that you are part of and that you take pride in was created by these creatures, and secondly, should we consider erasing these people from history, at least as far as is possible? I guess I'm talking about the dillemma of whether we can really seperate art from morality and can it ever be right to place art above morality, especially when kids are involved? Should we destroy the art of Leonardo, Michaelangelo and the rest, no matter how great or important it was? But, if we don't, what kind of mixed messages are we sending out to our children? There were parents with their children in that gallery, all standing in reverential awe at David, and whilst I guess it is important for them to know the part these men played in the history of art and of the development of western civilisation, I also feel it is necessary to point out as well what monsters these peeople were as human beings.
I'm posting this here, by the way, because I think I remember hearing Jonathan King say something about Michaelangelo once after his trial, so I thought I might get more of a discussion going here.

Well Becq, I do adore Michelangelo (my favourite artiste and the statue of David is my favourite work of art - if you've not seen the real thing, do go to Florence as the marble actually breathes, something photos and copies don't do) and yes, I love Florence.

I think your confusion comes with the gross misinterpretation and overuse of the word PAEDOPHILE.

Admiration for the human form as it grows, love for the mental and physical development of growing creatures, desire to help educate and inform and impart wisdom - these did not always come shrouded in a foul wrap of lust or animal passion.

And sex is not considered wrong by all races either. Love between two humans can often be a beautiful thing, rewarding for both parties.

The British obsession with dirt and abuse is a very local thing. Taking advantage of a vulnerable person is rightly reviled but not all "love" has to involve sex.

I loved my Mum and my dog. I love my friends and family. I love Michelangelo. I certainly wouldn't regard any of this love as sexual.

The civilisations of Greece and Florence reflected love for and appreciation of the beauty of humanity. It was not always linked to sex - and, when it was, I suspect the vast majority of relationships were consensual and acceptable.

In fact I bet those societies abhored abuse as much as we do. They just didn't have the media blurring the lines.

Well, I admit that looking into the eyes of Michaelangelo's 'Pieta', and witnessing the humanity there, did affect me. In fact it was the most moving aesthetic experience of my life. That doesn't cloud the fact that moments later when I saw an American mother and her two teenage children fawning over it, I felt like smashing that sculpture to pieces with a sledgehammer and I would have been warrented to do so.

I'm not so sure it it is the media that is a 'blurring the lines' as you say. Once you condone the idea that anyone under the age of 18 might even be considered attractive let alone a subject of reverence, then you are giving the green light to paedos in my book. ECPAT (the UN children's charity) are proposing that the United Nations bring in a new worldwide treaty that would require governments to destroy any artistic works created by any figure, living or dead, suspected or convicted of paedophilia. They are also pushing for the distinction between child pornography and 'art' to be done away with, so that works such as The Three Graces and David will be banned. I really hope every government, particularly the Italian, will have the courage to ratify this new treaty.

I'm sure they will Becq, I'm sure they will.

We can all look forward to the book burning on Bonfire night.

Actually, I agree with you entirely JK.

And I think the way that tabloids, religious freaks and femi-nazis have exploited and enlarged the definition of paedophilia and childabuse to include the sexual decisions or beauty of even late teens is quite repulsive.

But I did feel quite nauseous in that gallery in Florence. I couldn't help thinking 'well, fair play to Hitler, even he didn't organize obsequious readings of Kafka while sending his (Kafka's) cousins to the concentration camps'.

I think I will smell that nauseating stench of gross hypocricy again when I visit the Hadrian exhibition at the British Museum next week...