ARTISTIC LICENCE, REVOKED

IS THERE AN AGENDA DRIVING CERTAIN TYPES OF ART CENSORSHIP?

The media has had to deal with an increasing amount of censorship in recent years, which is to remove or supress something that is deemed perceptively unacceptable. But why does this happen? Does censorship highlight more issues than it hides?

With a growing number of artists being censored, the question arises: with over 100 million artists in the world, and given it was documented by NCAC that 840 artworks had been censored, what is the context by which these decisions are driven ?

So considering the scope of artistic licence being a democratic process, which should be representative of the world at large, art expresses opinions and needs to have the agency to do so. Maybe this is due to the artwork beginning to inquire about what truth we believe in regarding societal, personal to political ideas.

So why does this cause such a great issue? Art expresses opinions and needs to have the agency to do so. Maybe this is due to the artwork beginning to inquire about what truth we believe in regarding societal, personal to political ideas. Friedrich Nietzsche, a philosopher, spoke of how we perceive facts.

The way art challenges us, can cause us to shun it as we naturally move away that which is negative and move towards that which is not. However, we instead highlight the greater issues of society. An example of this, was when Tania Bruguera was forced to stop showing her artwork: Untitled, (Havana 2000), by authorities. This was due to her work depicting the result of a body under tyrannical regimes. Something that authorities did not want to show, as it would oppose their ideals and make the public question their authority.


Meet Jasmine on the Team page. Visit the Arts Department.


By Jasmine Chan: Arts Columnist


We must ask, is it societal or political reform the primary objective?

On the other hand, it is vital to remove things that could cause unnecessary distress to people. Art institutions especially, play a role in shaping our society’s culture. After-all the artifacts of a museum state facts, art makes statements. For instance, considerations for the audience is paramount. Organisations: such as the Tate and V&A, must continue to be careful to not isolate the minorities and audience who support the museum. Companies must keep a good relationship with these individuals. This is so that they can continue to keep the museum free for all who visit it, along with promoting a safe environment towards viewers.

In conclusion, censorship is necessary where there is no pretext upon which negative or not emotive response exists, unrelated to the purpose of art and is conflicted with the intended audience. Nevertheless, people should still be allowed the option to view the original creation while also being given the context of the work.

By not allowing people to see the original art piece, strives to strengthen the problems in which the artist wishes to highlight. Additionally, removing said offensive part of the artwork will infringe on the artist’s freedom of expression. Something that contradicts what art aims to do. That is, to allow various creatives to produce work that expresses their opinions about the world.


MACKAYAN: ARTISTIC LICENSE, REVOKED


Continue the Conversation…

What are your thoughts on this subject? Let us know by leaving a review on the Google Front page, sharing on social media or leaving a comment.