A University art lecturer has been excluded from an exhibition organised by the Malta Council for Culture and the Arts because his art installation could have been "libellous" towards politicians.
But artist and curator Raphael Vella insists that his piece, entitled Pornolitics and made up of 16 digitally manipulated images, is much more subtle than what people have imagined.
"There is a big misconception. The piece does not show politicians having sex. I just superimposed silhouettes of people in erotic and pornographic poses with images of politicians discussing politics on television. It's simply a symbolic metaphor," he said, when contacted.
"Just like pornography is the illusion of sex where the actors have fake breasts and pretend to enjoy themselves, politics is all about the manipulation of media and creating the right package.
"The pornographic images are blurred and are separate from the pictures of politicians. You don't even see any genitals or pubic hair. Even the faces of politicians are grainy and barely recognisable," he insists.
When contacted, the council's CEO, Davinia Galea, said that there was a fine line between provocative and libellous art. She said one of the prints also poked fun at the President, which would have been illegal under a separate law, not just libellous.
"We consulted several lawyers and critical analysts, all experts in the arts. They agreed that the images could be libellous and that if something like this went to court the offended party would probably win," she said.
"I don't agree with censorship and I think the laws should be amended. But this isn't about censorship, it is about libel. As things stand the laws are there and it would have been irresponsible and too risky for us to go through with this, regardless of whether we agree or disagree with the laws," Ms Galea said.
Dr Vella is surprised that he is becoming "famous" for this installation, because he considers it to be a minor work. He said he was a bit ticked off by the council's decision because he wanted to show his work but he is not going to make a big issue of it.
"I'm not interested in the sensational aspect. But I'm a bit upset because I invested six weeks of work into this after the Council invited me to take part in the exhibition," Dr Vella said.
He added that a number of people have tried to persuade him to show the work anyway. One even promised to set up a fund in the artist's name to cover the legal expenses just in case he gets sued.
Instead he is considering organising a private viewing for people he trusts or taking the exhibit abroad, but he's also thinking of leaving it to everyone's imagination.
"I was told that at the opening of the exhibition people were discussing my piece rather than the ones that were actually on display. They came up with all sorts of theories of what it could have been, all much more inventive than the real version. I suppose it could be just as effective if it exists only in people's imagination.
"I can't imagine a politician suing an artist for something like this. Imagine how conservative that would make him or her look! And what about all the caricatures we see on newspapers? Aren't they poking fun at politicians too?"
The installation was meant to feature in a collective exhibition with seven other artists entitled the Life Model. It is being held this month at No. 68, a contemporary exhibition space in St Lucy Street, Valletta, but Dr Vella's work was removed at the last minute after the council received advice from its lawyers.
According to the council's website, the aim of the exhibition is to "engage the audience in public debate and look at the history of our acceptance of nudity and on the bareness of the naked body and how this can sum up everything to which we aspire and everything we most fear".
cperegin@timesofmalta.com