Friday, 10th July 2009
STITCHED UP
Forgive me if I've used the title ‘ere above before, though it might have been in my Saturday column, since it didn't appear in the list of my blogs that appears below.
More precisely, I didn't see it there, but it's virtually the crack of dawn when I'm writing this.
On Thursday, I went to the opening of the exhibition being held at Number 68 in St Lucy Street, Valletta: it's an exhibition titled "The Life Model" and it tackles the human form, mostly unclothed, hardly surprisingly.
It was with some trepidation that I approached the venue. Not because I was expecting the denizens of the area to be up in arms because their sacred ground (aka parking spaces) had been desecrated. To start with, it hasn't, since exactly the same number of spaces remain after the Council's adjustment and, secondly, people like the cowards who are bugging the gallery owner about the matter don't come out into the light.
No, I was worried because by attending a public event where, horror of horrors, images that might be of a corrupting influence were exposed, I might in turn expose my myself to the full rigours of the law and bring upon myself the wrath of the fundamentalists personified and exemplified by such as Ms Theresa Friggieri, the Chair of the redoubtable body of men and women that has arrogated to itself the right to tell me, and sundry other adults, how to exercise my freedom to acquire information.
Fully expecting to have to knock three times and then knock again, briefly, in order to identify myself as a non-fundamentalist, I needn't have worried, as apparently, the forces of darkness have taken some time off. So I was informed by a young legal beagle, who told me that the case instituted to have the ban on Stitching reversed, has had to have been put off to 25th September because one of the defendants was away.
Or something like that.
The hearing in September promises to be quite a bit of fun, I hear. A number of worthies have been summoned, amongst whom, apparently, is former Chief Justice Mifsud Bonnici, who has already expounded on the matter in that vehicle for the dissemination of philosophy and deep thinking, Xarabank. An enterprising Director of Courts would contemplate moving the show to a larger court and selling tickets, the proceeds of which would go some way to ensuring that proper air-conditioning is available, lest a functionary be incarcerated for failing to ensure cool sweet air in the hallowed halls of justice.
Getting back to the exhibition, it was still on when I left, about 45 minutes after the speeches had ended, and on my way to a rather decent salad at Jubilee just above the road, I didn't spot any suitably attired Thought Police getting ready to storm the place and ensure that the populace is not intellectually challenged by having to look at nekkid bits and bobs.
Frankly, I am appalled.
How remiss of those who would seek to ensure that I only think what they want me to think, I only see what they think I am capable of seeing. The opportunity was there for some good, wholesome pictures to be put up, to cover over that awful filth, and it was eschewed, leaving me and my psyche vulnerable to the full impact of, not to put too fine a point on it, nudity.
RSS
Comments
"Are you not aware that totalitarian regimes perverted the arts - including plays - specifically for the purpose of perpetuating their evil rule? " . yes they're called propaganda, and they are state sposnsored. Get it. STATE sponsored. And guess what, they were not successful. so no i can't think of a play which succesfully poisoned society. perhaps you should name one.
"i am proud to have been involved in plays - then considered illegal - exposing dictatorship for what it is." Really ? you took part in illegal plays.? since when?
As for moral fibre, what's so moral about commenting on something you have not seen?
The term 'art' is very elusive.
A Caravaggio, a Rubens or a Bernini is art, so is a Picasso or Duchamp's 'Fountain' and many more controversial artworks which followed.
Photography has been considered as art since Daguerre and Nadar's first snapshots in early 19th century. You can look up photographers such as Henri Cartier-Bresson, Edward Weston or Man Ray, and for more controvercial ones you can look up David Hockney or Barbara Kruger and many others even more controversial but equally valid artists.
Now whether or not certain art is to one's personal liking is open to debate and discussion of course. But they all fall under the heading of art.
Photography
–noun
1. the process or art of producing images of objects on sensitized surfaces by the chemical action of light or of other forms of radiant energy, as x-rays, gamma rays, or cosmic rays.
Any further comments on this matter would be superfluous.
Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/photography
Just one point before I retire from this conversation: ART KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES
Democracy does not need bleeding heart liberals, Mr Gatt, it needs people of moral fibre.
Did Simon Azzopardi ever dispute that Caravaggio and Rubens were great artists?
There was no need for an apology. We're only giving opinions. After all, apart from artistic talent, artistic appreciation is a matter of personal taste.
As for Joseph Camilleri and other local artists, yes, it is a shame that local talent is seldom appreciated or given the exposure it deserves.
Regarding my reference to Christianity, it was a general comment, and not specifically addressed to you (although it may seem so since it was included in my reply to you). What I mean is that I find it very puzzling that many Christians don't see the human body as art (whether it was simply a product of evolution or God's creation). Unfortunately many still fail to see the difference between nudity as art, and pornography.
Please see the below! Certainly worth your while and may be an eye opener!
www.caravaggio.com,www.rubens.com
i am showing you masterpieces
Please see the below! Certainly worth your while and may be an eye opener!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1192595/Banksy-pulls-audacious-stunt--secret-exhibition-Bristol-museum.html
Please note that sometimes these comments are read by people who recognize that with new technology, different art forms evolve. If you wish to laugh at the true claim that photography can be art, please note that people used to laugh at the claim that the earth revolves around the sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_art_photography
I live in London. I work in theatre and I'm mercifully exposed to the arts much more than you seem to be. Ms. Pace's work is of excellent artistic merit and if you think that what you saw at the exhibition is 'pornography' and that such art is never showcased outside 'shameful' Malta then I suggest you crawl back inside your shell.
Why call atristic nudity a "sub-form of photographic art". Do you mean to say that Michaelangelo's nude paintings was sub-form of art?
I would have expected that Christians would be the most proud of the human body, considering they believe the ultimate artist (God) created it. I guess I was wrong.
The late Joseph Camilleri was, is, in my opinion one of the best international photographic artist. Forget nudity or any other sub-form of photographic art and look up this Maltese genius' great masterpieces. The following link shows just a few of his artistic contributions. ahttp://www.maltaphotographicsociety.org/www/mps/mps.nsf/c79e3951ad1cbd85c125707d007e5e07/11a2f323446cb849c12571c30048718e/$FILE/IntoMyImagination%20Catalog.pdf
please note that sometimes these comments are read from abroad so please lets not make people laugh by saying that photography is art.these two are far apart because art is immortality like the great paintings of great artists.so please dont say tha photography is art.photography is just a profession or a hobby.take a photo of a nude woman than tell an artist to paint it.then see the difference.
Since you are such an art expert and have travelled extensively (London!) in search for real art, have you come across the works by highly respected Paul McCarthy (currently showed at the Tate Modern)?
I would recommend you refrain from commenting on Art as clearly you do not value modern art. Art is progressive with time and changes with history (as an Art expert, you should know this), photography has been known to be an art for decades, nudity has been featured in art for centuries. You clearly have no knowledge on the subject "Art".
If you would like to criticise art, please stick to the Art form shown in the medium of paint and canvas. Otherwise, just state that you do not understand other art forms and therefore cannot have an opinion.
Simon Azzopardi
Oxford
re your question:
"if someone of you have visited ART exhibition in london in nowhere of them you will find,lets say not pornografic but erotic photos like those exhibited by ms pace.till today i cant understand the difference between pornografic and erotic.could someone of you intellectuals tell me the difference."
There is a very fine line, however there is a difference which is best explained when one considers the 'explicitness' of how the artwork is presented. For instance the 'Dance of Solome' would have qualified as the latter, whereas the art of 'Forbidden Pompeii' would be more akin to the former.
@ Christopher Ripard
re "I just hope your views don't harm society"
So you like Meletus, would condemn Mr. Gatt to drink poison hemlock in your zeal to limit the 'corruption' of Maltese society is it? Stitching and Blasted it seems are the 'dangerous' new 'meme', that infectious unit of cultural information transmitted from mind to mind like swine flu! Incredibly, you actually even think this is seditious since you couch it in that accusatory language! Why, because Theatre can question political, moral, and legal matters? Democracy requires courage not censorship. A European democracy should be able to cope with questioning and not exhibit infantile states of anxiety via a censorship board!
If you truly think that photography is just clicking a camera button, no wonder you do not classify good photography as art.
no i have never seen porn.i am a happy married man and dont need to seen porn films,stitched up or alexandra pace nude photos.
You've clearly never enjoyed a minute of good porn. I suggest you do so.
I am not confusing exhibitions The Life Model has two photographers and a video installation and all of them are art.
I mentioned David la Chapelle & Pierre Gilles because they are photographers and there work is Art. Painting is not the only form of Art. Google them.
"But 'Blasted' isn't art! It taught me nothing I didn't know already (except that its author was a basket case)." Nice touch!
Blasted is a very dark experience inspired by all the horrors that where going on in Bosnia while we, the audience, were comfortably ensconced in our daily life. Kane purposely breaks down the conventions of a bedroom drama to disorient us and throw us headlong into hell.
We may discuss the qualities of the Malta production (which incidentally took place at the same time as the NY premiere). I personally was not keen on the direction as it was slow paced and i thought the actor playing the journalist was indulgent. I thought the Maltese actors were excellent.
But you can possibly understand the play better if you read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasted
and this http://www.villagevoice.com/2008-10-15/theater/blasted-sarah-kane-s-famous-play-gets-its-first-nyc-production/.
But ultimately t my point: is we can agree to disagree but we debate from a point of knowledge not other people's opinion. And that is the point of theatre and ultimately Art.
PS Incidentally Kane did not call for nudity in any of her plays and was actually quite a prude and disapproved of it.
You can't be serious! And those are aesthetically very pleasing pictures to boot! To think that you want to classify them as pornography! So an erotic group of nudes painted on canvas is fine but the same thing as expressed through the medium of photography is not! I thought the masks, the nudity and the colourful balloons were a good comment on Maltese society actually, didn’t you? Hurray for Alexandra I hope she bursts as many balloons as she chooses!!!!
i think we are mixing exhibitions.i was talking about alexendra pace photo shoots at a recent art exhibiton.nude man were used in these shoots and these photos were a shame compared to the art works exibited in that exhibition.
'Being able to watch/hear anything, at any age, anytime, is not "freedom" but - I repeat - anarchy.
Really is that why you are so in need of Big Brother/Sister the censor board? What are you afraid of ? The possibility of making your own choice? Don't force sanitised art down European Malta's throat; 'If something is absolute crap' let paying viewers decide for themselves. Your view on freedom and the arts is more in line with that of those great guardians of public decency and moral rectitude: the governments of 1930's Germany and Italy. Art is not a question of sanitised and aesthetically beautiful and pleasing pieces only. It can also challenge the social and if necessary the political status quo. Any democracy should be able to handle that, particularly a European democracy.
There were two artists exhibiting photography in that exhibition and another who had video installations are those not art ? Are you saying that the work of David la Chapelle & Pierre Gilles is not art ?
yes of course i am serious.if you are an art expert please tell me what artistic values a half a dozen naked man with a mask on have?we are talking on a photo not a painting
The problem with your argument is that you catch yourself in a bind. you start off with absolutes and then start putting in qualifiers.You say "Being able to watch/hear anything, at any age, anytime is not freedom. Well nobody is saying that.it is but neither is someone who tells you what to read or write. Should we start banning books again, by any chance?.
People who want others to take decisions for them are ultimately afraid of democracy. Censorship can only stifle debate, it cannot prevent anarchy. In fact t is a form of anarchy because it is based on one person's whim. That sort of thinking is also known as fascism.
Which incidentally is the theme of 'Blasted', a play as shocking and relevant as Pasolini's film '100 days of Sodom' was in its time (and still is today).
Who said that all art has to be beautiful or redeeming. Does Chris think Medea is beautiful or redeeming? If you think something is crap, that is your right, but when you impose your opinion on others, that is truly anarchy. How sad!
Fundamentalists possibly fail to understand that those who can move on with life (non-fundamentalists) are totally committed to the right of all fundamentalists to live their lives by their state-of-the-art fundamentalist principles.
Non-fundamentalists are generally upset by the fundamentalist because fundamentalists demand the right to impose their fundamentalist values on all the rest, to the exclusion of all other humanist values that lead a person to ‘completeness’ .
Non-fundamentalists may be as upset by those who know better, yet bring forward sophist argumentation to support power-structures based on fundamentalist principles which structures infringe on the liberties of those who have moved on with life.
What I find amusingly intriguing in the Malta equation is the way I see the strong power-structures based on fundamentalist principles in-fight continuously with the humanists yet the two still manage to come together ‘in season’.
Understanding the gelling factor may go some way to understand the real Malta of today.
As regards my personal opinion - to which I and everyone is entitled - were you to ask me what constitutes "crap" I would soon reply "Blasted", for example, which has no redeeming features whatsoever. Thankfully, its author can no longer inflict further rubbish upon us.
As for ABC, well, from a man who makes his living defining if people have crossed laws or obeyed them, I think its pretty rich that he's all for anarchy!!
And who pray, will decide what constitutes 'crap ' that people should not see ? You or our hallowed, yes fundamentalist censorship board.
One taliban's 'crap' is another man's art form
And yes, in case you're asking, I agree with censorship, even though I have done one or two bits and bobs on the boards and know that a liberal attitude is practically a 'sine qua non' to most thespians. If something is absolute crap, people shouldn't see it. Go ahead, call me fundamentalist - I'm in good company.
No wonder. The system must be plugged up with frivolous cases which a simple screening process would eliminate in five minutes, starting with the case set for a September 25 hearing.
People in Malta are fast imitating North Americans who sue a jumping flea because they can and not because it makes any sense. In the meantime, however, ladies and gentlemen of a certain profession, continue to rake in the dough on which, the honest ones, pay a lot of income tax!
By the way, the justice there does not move much faster.