Charles Saatchi is selling paintings of Nigella Lawson being throttled.

It was just over a year ago that art mogul Charles Saatchi was photographed grabbing the neck of his then-wife, Nigella Lawson.

And now, the 71-year-old is selling artisic impressions of the horrific moment on his website.

Yes, paintings of Saatchi throttling a a visibly distraught Lawson are being listed for sale for as much as $10,600AUD.

Pictures like this:

And this:

And this:

You’ve got to be kidding us, right?

The images, ranging from the detailed to the amateur, have appeared on SaatchiArt.com – and cost anywhere between £150 and tens of thousands of dollars. The works have been submitted to the website by the artists themselves, who upload their work and receive 70 percent of the asking price – while the website receives 30 per cent of the cost of the sale.

Not surprisingly, Saatchi has defended the sale of the works, saying he did not commission the artwork . He told The Mail on Sunday, “Would it have been a better story if I had censored artists whose work might be personally disobliging?”

Well, yes.

Art can be used to draw attention to atrocities, or to record a particular cultural mood or moment in time, or to make people think.

But by allowing these works to be listed for sale on SaatchiArt.com, Charles Saatchi is directly making a profit from his assault on Nigella Lawson.

54-year-old Lawson became the focus of worldwide media attention, and was dragged through the courts in the aftermath of their split – and Saatchi’s empire will make a profit from his attack on his then-wife.

The artists who have uploaded these works, do not appear to have considered that perspective. Or if they have, they call it “ironic” that Saatchi benefits from the sale of the works.

One artist, Darren Udaiyan, is selling a Van Gogh-style image of the scene for £5,870. He told The Daily Mail, “It’s not really controversial. Saatchi is strangling Nigella but it’s also about him squeezing the art market. It works on many levels. It’s a comment on the art market and how people control it.”

Pete Jones, who is selling a painting listed for £17,600, told the paper, “When those pictures hit the newspapers that photo said, ‘Come and paint me.’ It’s not the best execution, but that’s not what’s important. It’s ironic that this picture is for sale as art and there’s Mr Saatchi lining his pockets from it. He’s profiting from that image.”

Jane Kelly said that she didn’t expect her art would be allowed to stay on the website. “I’m sure Saatchi doesn’t want a picture of him throttling his wife on his own website. I put it on there to have a laugh at Saatchi,” she said.

But you have to wonder whether Nigella Lawson will be laughing at the images.

Rebecca Wilson, who is the chief curator at the online gallery, said that the artworks had not been removed because, “Saatchi Art does not believe in censorship unless the material is pornographic or incites racial hatred.”

So images that incite hatred of women are presumably okay, then.

Glad we cleared that up.

Do you think these artworks should be listed for sale, as they draw attention to a serious issue in our society? Or do you think Saatchi should remove the paintings?