Thomas, 1

Bailey Thomas `

Gardner, 4th Period

English Honors

6 May 2017

Modern Suppression In Art Culture

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines art as something that is created with

imagination and skill and that is beautiful or expresses important ideas or feelings; Author and

philosopher Oscar Wilde defines art as the most intense mode of individualism that the world

has known (Popova); but to each individual art possesses a different definition, a different

meaning, a different impact. Art censorship is the covering or oppression of pieces of visual or

performance art, generally ones that are viewed as offensive, obscene or inflammatory. However,

art is made to create personal conflict and inspire thought. Art censorship largely affects the

public by deciding what they will be allowed or able to view, admire, or criticise; however, it

also affects artists themselves by diminishing the value of their work and impacting their careers.

By allowing, encouraging, and enforcing art censorship globally, we allow politics, fear, and

controversy to stifle the voice of artists, for political as well as moralistic reasons, -taking power

away from artists due to personal discomfort, promoting political suppression, and preventing the

public and educational institutions from viewing potentially powerful images.

Many would argue that inherently pornographic, intensely controversial or otherwise

obscene images should not be publicly promoted or displayed nor should they be viewed or

created in schools. For example, there are many cases in which artists have been killed for their

depictions of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad, and they created those pieces in full
 Thomas,

understanding of the creative risk that they were taking with their lives. However, a man was

brought to court for his depictions of unclothed adolescents in his paintings and photographs,

despite his pure intentions with his art (Hartord). Another argument that supports censorship is

the appeal to national security and the risk of unlimited access, especially with the ease of access

to wide ranges of information on the internet. Lombardo, in an article she wrote comparing and

contrasting the views of art censorship, implies the availability of radical groups to promote

themselves if censorship was not enforced: the amount and kind of information anyone can

access and disseminate online, terrorists will have limited access, if not, no access to pertinent

information that they can use to cause harm. While this is true, censorship itself does not

prevent the advertising of these terrorist groups. To generalize, censorship is commonly used to

cover works of art that inspire violence or unrest in large groups- whether the pieces are

debatably pornogaphic, religiously charged, or racially significant- and can also be used to

restrict a wide range of access to radical sources. Truthfully, art is very powerful; it can and will

inspire opposition and sometimes anger. Nonetheless, art speaks through imagery, color, and

emotion, and by attempting to censor any piece of art due to conflict or government authority, we

are submitting to false truths.

Both the support and opposition of art censorship value and support the arts and the

importance that art holds globally and historically. However, it is commonly used to project

other peoples morals and beliefs onto the general population. In a world where freedom of

speech is so importantly fought for and valued, how can we allow the discomfort of small groups

to prevent the public from viewing images created to tell a purpose? In an article written by Erin

Tapley, he touched on censorship in his own educational experience, concluding that while
 Thomas,

people often maintain that nudity or violence in art should be allowed, they draw the line when

such themes could be construed as pornographic, tasteless, or blasphemous. His own

speculation on why many people find themselves in support of censorship is very accurate- it

largely lies in discomfort. Additionally, an artist was banned from performance art for 10 years

for producing a performance that was described as an obscene act in public despite the lack of

actual nudity in the performance (Tsur). This act of censorship was very impactful for this artist-

his career being put on hold and largely hindered by the ban on performance art following the

incident. It is also another example of morals and personal perceptions being imposed onto a

large audience. An artist by the name of Louzla Darabi had created a painting of a man and

woman having sex with text from the Koran sprawled across the top; this painting was hung in a

gallery in Sweden- Darabis intended purpose was to depict the acceptance of female sexuality in

a largely patriarchal society (Sawaya). In response to this specific scenario with Darabi, author

Nicolas Sawaya put the general opinion of the opposition to art censorship into a very

straightforward and honest truth: it seems unlikely to me that any painting, sculpture, or prose

could be purely pornographic, entirely devoid of aesthetic importance to anyone. The

censorship of this image- dignified by the intense sexual nature of the piece- overshadowed the

importance and significance of the piece, an issue that frequently occurs. These incidents are all

cases of censorship in which authority was used to discontinue images simply because of

personal or moralistic discomfort, ignoring each of these pieces greater purpose as works of art.

In conclusion, if a small groups discomfort can prevent impactful and important pieces of

artwork from being publicly viewed and there is no fight back against this enforcement of

morals, then the art world may as well have no voice at all- their loudest voice is being stifled.
 Thomas,

By using government abilities and power to censor exhibits due to political disagreement

or due to any minorities opposition to the government, there is a great loss in human freedoms.

Last year a Cuban artist named Maldonado was arrested and held by authorities for publicly

criticising Fidel Castro, the controversial (and now deceased) Cuban leader (Batycka). In his

work, Maldonado painted the names Fidel and Raul on two pigs as well as referring to Castro as

a mare in a video that he filmed and uploaded to social media. Maldonado was arrested and

held in prison for 10 months due to the pig incident- something that arguably did not deserve jail

time and he clearly faced a very severe sentencing simply for painting a name onto a pig. Albeit

this rendition of the name Castro on the animal was a clearly stated message, the allowing of

censorship encourages this type of behavior from governments attempting to stifle the opinions

of their own citizens and attempting to make an example out of people acting as revolutionaries

for their countries through their artwork. Also recently, the Chinese government discontinued an

exhibit in China due to its obvious representation of equality between men and women; this

exhibit would have been revolutionary in its public promotion of gender equality and is

speculated to have most likely been shut down due to a result of sensitivity to any open

discussion of human rights in China. This is similar to many other cases where government

authority was used to silene revolutionary actions, no matter how peaceful they are. By using

government abilities and power to censor exhibits due to political disagreement or due to any

minorities opposition to the government, there is a great loss in human freedoms. Many accounts

of global censorship are strongly connected to and enforced by the abuse of government powers

to prevent any widespread public opposition to ideas or views of the government. If art

censorship is abused so frequently by officials to suppress opposition of political or social views

 Thomas,

in countries with limited human freedoms, then the support of the censorship is also support of-

and an excuse for- the continuous abuse of these powers.

Frequently, art censorship is used to avoid conflict of any sort, especially in educational

settings between teachers, faculty, and the parents of students. In 1980 Professor Erin Tapley

taught Art History 2 at a community college and during his time there he held a publication for

students to showcase their artwork (Tapley). In multiple cases, the work was vetoed by

supervisors due to controversial images or topics shown in the work simply because the

supervisors didnt want to risk inflammation on campus due to the images. In many schools,

books such as Huckleberry Finn and other classical works are art are banned from being taught

due to the racial slurs presented in the books, and other works of literature due to the sexual or

racial content. Many of the concerns with these books are projected by parents of children,

despite the lack of research that to prove that reading about violence or sexual acts will change

children's behaviour towards other people. If there is an issue, it could largely be blamed on the

way a piece of literature is taught or talked about within an educational setting rather than the

writing itself. This information continues to support that art censorship is usually used in case of

personal issues with the subject matter shown and thus is used as an easy out to avoid conflicts of

interest. Therefore, it is unnecessary in many situations and doesnt support the integrity of

artists, their work, or the art industry itself.

In conclusion, art censorship is used largely to avoid conflict, impose personal opinions,

and strengthen government ideals within countries. Promoting and enforcing art censorship only

hurts the art industry- especially for artists trying to make an impact with their work or even

artists simply trying to voice their own thoughts and beliefs- and provides little benefit to society
 Thomas,

except relieving small groups of people who are uncomfortable by these works of art. As art

censorship continues to be a large movement within the world, within countries, within schools,

and within our own lives, it is important for us to speak loudly for artwork, to support exhibits

and artists of controversial merit, and to allow the exploitation of the full freedom that art can

possibly possess.

Works Cited

Batycka, Dorian. 15 Artists, Shows, and Works Censored in 2016. Hyperallergic,

Hyperallergic, 30

Dec. 2016, hyperallergic.com/348512/15-artists-shows-and-works-censored-in-2016/.

Harford, Sonia. "Porn Or Moral Panic? Modern Art's Quandary." The Age (Melbourne), 08 Jun,

2013, pp. 17, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.

Lombardo, Crystal, et al. Pros and Cons of Censorship. Vision Launch, 14 Jan. 2017,

visionlaunch.com/pros-and-cons-of-censorship/

Popova, Maria. "What Is Art? Favorite Famous Definitions, from Antiquity to Today." Brain

Pickings.

Brain Pickings, 17 Sept. 2015.

Sawaya, Nicolas. "Self-Censorship: The Hidden Gag Order." University Wire, 2015, SIRS Issues

Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.
 Thomas,

Tapley, Erin. "Scrutinized Art: The Many Faces of Visual Art Censorship." Art Education

(Vol.55, No.6),

Nov, 2002, pp. 48, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.

Tsui, Enid. "As Singapore Art Week Grows Behind Heavy Government Push, some.." South

China

Morning Post, 12 Feb, 2016, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.

Unk. 9 Controversial Portrayals of Muhammad. NY Daily News, 7 Jan. 2015

www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/9-controversial-portrayals-mohammed-spurred-bac

klash-article-1.2068915.