Arts Council agrees legislative changes are needed to protect creativity

Franco Rizzo

Jan 16th 2010, 02:21

@ Frans Sammut

With knowledge that I'm going to put to question an opinion of an upheld Maltese author, whom I admire, I have to make certain observations.

Art is in itself an extremely broad term that it is to this day hotly debated, and one issue is what can be called Art and not. How would you explain the fact that graffiti managed to find its way in an Art museum? (Banksy in Bristol Museum: http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/bristol/hi/people_and_places/arts_and_culture/newsid_8096000/8096891.stm) Unconventional to say the least, surely of dubious artistic value, yet there it is.

As is Gustave Courbet's 'L'Origine du Monde', at the Musee D'Orsay:
http://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/collections/works-in-focus/search/commentaire/commentaire_id/the-origin-of-the-world-3122.html

Speaking of subtlety: take Harold Pinter, an uncontested literary giant, attributed creator of the 'pregnant pause', a genius in subtlety for that matter, who praised Sarah Kane's 'Blasted' - a work containing scenes of rape and cannibalism. Surely Pinter must have seen something beneath the layer of disturbing content for him to come in defence of Kane's work...

In regards the Arts Council reaction, their statement is well-received.

m.portelli

Jan 15th 2010, 22:07

@ Frans Sammut

Rather too fond of repressive self-censorship are we? "Real art does not encounter difficulties with "classifications of creative works" No? really? Go tell that to Michelangelo for his Christo della Minerva and Goya for his La Maja Desnuda, Klimt for his 'Medicine'. How on earth do you interpret Twain and Wilde’s experiences and exasperation with censorship? No philistine ranting can negate the creative force of the likes of Rimbaud and Baudelaire. Indeed, the world of literature became enriched through their disregard for self-censorship. I find it incredible that you keep insisting on a straight jacket for something as fluid and dynamic as Art! It is indeed ‘enlightening’ to hear you express such disdain for creative courage and worship so fervently at the altar of repression. The Art Council’s declaration is most welcome, perhaps at last the creative community can engage in a proper dialogue and Maltese society finally comes of age. What else should be the case in a European democracy?

Robert Agius

Jan 15th 2010, 18:40

@ J Farrugia What's your knowledge about arts? cause i can assure you that vulgarity, obscenity and insults could be and have been a part or art for a long time. However, it's the way people digest it that is the problem.

MBorg

Jan 15th 2010, 17:42

@ Frans Sammut Well said ! It is not what you write but the way you write it that counts. The Malta Council for Culture and the Arts does not need to ask for the protection of " art or freedom of expression for anything that is plain vulgar. " Public maturity or current realities " must never condone blasphemy or obscenity in the name of art. The human rights of the individual must be protected from these " artists who are asking to be allowed to develop freely " .if by " develop freely " means doing away with censorship

Lisa Galea

Jan 15th 2010, 16:45

@ J.Farrugia

Naked bodies have adorned the most prestigious art sanctuaries. There is a difference between nude and vulgarity. A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.

toni attard

Jan 15th 2010, 16:28

Congratulations for taking such a strong position on the matter! I fully endorse your statement.

Frederick Abdilla

Jan 15th 2010, 16:14

Proset lil Arts Council li fl-ahhar tkellem fuq dan is-suggett!

Frans Sammut

Jan 15th 2010, 15:43

What is the Malta Council for Culture and the Arts? Who are its members?
As a writer I've never been contacted by it/them.
Not that I need them either, whoever they may be.
Art, real art does not need such Councils, their counsels or their subsidies, unless it is an 'art' with an agenda. Nor does it need their protection either.
Real art does not encounter difficulties with "classifications of creative works" - whatever that may mean.
Real attempts at art are regulated by the artist's own maturity, censorship is administered by the artist him/herself. It is part and parcel of the "less is more and more is less" yardstick continuously and strenuously employed by the wo/man behind the pen, the brush and other instruments adopted by the various forms of art.
I know because I've been at it for over 45 years.
One of my short stories depicted the very same subject that is at the core of the current controversy. But its delivery was so 'subtle' (I use the word not to use 'artistic' and sound grandiose) that a well-known critic did not even discover what I was talking about - to my great amusement.

P Attard

Jan 15th 2010, 14:57

Agree fully with the principles set out by the Arts Council in order to protect and promote creativity and freedom of expression. The Council's opinion reflects international policies and criteria. I do not agree with restrictions imposed directly or indirectly on authors and artists. However, I also object to the exploitation and dissemination of vulgarity and obscenity under the pretext of art. Artists and authors should not be prosecuted but freedom of expression should not be abused, either.

J Farrutgia

Jan 15th 2010, 14:43

Is vulgarity, obscenity and insults, connected with creativity? For me these are just lowering one's self to the lowest human esteem of 'hammallagni'. That's what. There is no other name for vulgarities. Surely it is not art. If 'art' means naked bodies and vulgarity then let's change the name and not the law.