A photograph of an award-winning artwork designed to provoke debate about the status of women has caused the deputy speaker to call for art censorship, reports Hazel Friedman
The deputy speaker of the National Assembly, Baleka Kgositsile, has stirred up furious controversy in the art community with an attack on the Mail & Guardian for publishing the photograph of a prize- winning artwork.
Kgositsile denies that she wants art censorship. But in an interview this week, she reiterated her view that “regulations” should be introduced to prevent newspapers from publishing certain images, and that “people’s pride and dignity cannot be trampled on in the name of freedom of expression”.
The controversial artwork reproduced in this newspaper two weeks ago won this year’s prize at the annual Martienssen student exhibition at the University of the Witwatersrand.
Entitled Useful Objects, it consists of a half- smoked Gauloise Blonde cigarette in a ceramic ashtray “resembling [according to this reviewer] a black vagina, lips or a turd”.
In an article written for the Star on Tuesday, under the headline “Poor taste must not pose as art”, the deputy speaker described the “outrage” suffered by “many black women” due to the M&G’s photograph of the winning work.
She concluded: “If need be, legislation must protect our people from degradation that is likely to continue in the name of trying to keep up with some arbitrary artistic ideals not set by the majority of those affected by these academic debates.”
Kgositsile’s call for new censorship comes as parliament is debating a new, liberal film and publications Bill (see story above). But her proposal for a tightening of the anti-pornography elements of the Bill and for the inclusion of newspapers within it would go even further than the old Publications Act, which always excluded newspapers.
Academics at Wits, the university which is exhibiting the controversial work, said this week that while they “respect and take seriously” her concerns about racism and sexism, they believe “it is essential that artworks such as Useful Objects be opened to public scrutiny”.
“Given South Africa’s history, particularly, we need to be critical and not fall back on any form of censorship”, says acting head of the Fine Arts Department at Wits, Penny Siopis. “The news media are crucial for engaging in such debates and should be supported in their task, however difficult.”
“The interpretation of an artistic image is always in the eye of the beholder,” said artist and director of the 1997 Johannesburg Biennale, Bongi Dhlomo. “People’s responses will depend on their own personal contexts and frames of reference. The very arbitrariness of art presents a warning against any form of censorship.”
Artist and critic Kendell Geers said it would be “a very sad day when the state censors artists and sends them into exile. Politicians are quick to co- opt art to their own ends when it serves their needs and quick to condemn it when it does not.”
There are also widespread fears that Kgositsile’s attack signals a move to reintroduce apartheid-style censorship.
“We’ve been warning of these dangers,” says the parliamentary affairs manager for the South African Institute of Race Relations, Colin Douglas. “Once you give government the power to censor one thing they have the ability to censor another. The kind of societal reasons for censorship cited by Kgositsile sound ominously like those of the National Party when it was in power.”
Ironically the offending work was produced by a third-year female student, Kaolin Thompson. Operating within the tradition of feminist criticism, it aims to confront the very issues highlighted by Kgositsile in her article, namely the degradation of women.
“Even though I didn’t intend it to be racially specific, I wanted the work to be about pain, to highlight the objectification of women and to place the personal in the public sphere”, explained Thompson.
“The work touches on taboos and that is one of its strengths,” added artist and fine art lecturer Leora Farber, who was one of the Martiennsen judges.
“Its ironies, parodies and biting criticism can easily be understood within the context of contemporary art, not as advocating violence, but condemning it,” she said.
Kgositsile admitted this week that her response might have been different if she had known the work was by a woman and a feminist. But she insists that her message would have remained the same.
“We are not saying that artists should be arrested for creating, exhibiting, or selling their art, no matter how controversial.
“But certain art should not go into the public domain, particularly at this point of our history, with our legacy of oppression. I represent traditional black women whose history is vastly different to those of their white counterparts, and who, because of that, perceive things differently.”
She added: “Material must be classified to exercise discretion as to what is harmless and what is not. And in the interests of nation-building, newspapers have a responsibility to ensure this.”
But many “traditionalists” stop short of calling for a return to censorship. Helen Sebidi, one of South Africa’s foremost artists — a self-confessed conservative and anti-feminist — is one of them.
Born in Hammanskraal, she learnt from an early age what it was to suffer abuse, not at the hands of a man, but a white woman. “I wasn’t treated like a human, but an object,” she recalled. Sebidi has taken a strong personal stand against the artistic representation of nudes and sexual organs which she describes as “the garden of God”. She also advocates a return to traditional African values. But she insists that others have the right to feel and act differently.
Even religious groups are divided over the issue of censorship. A representative from the African Christian Democratic Party said: “the government must protect the country’s morals through censorship.”
Rhema church, however, was more circumspect. Said Pastor Ron Steele: “One hates to speak of censorship, particularly because of its effects during apartheid. And although newspapers have a responsibility to lean towards caution, we would be loath to have legislation forcing them to toe the line.”