***  Haus der Kulturen der Welt: Forum1 Archive  ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   [Date]: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 14:44:49 -0800
   [From]: Susan Marquez <smarq@pacbell.net>
     [To]: Cultural Exchange via Internet <forum1@hkw.kbx.de>
[Subject]: Opinions versus Censorship

Thank you, Britta for your recent discussions about the more extreme elements in contemporary Chinese art. I personally see merit in the work of Damien Hirst versus the work in Beijing, which smacks of human and animal rights violations above all else. I am assuming that the exhibition you mentioned was closed down because of the possible hygiene issues in displaying decomposing matter in an open space accessible to the public. Such action was to be taken against Hirst in New York if he had gone through with a particular natural history sculpture containing pigs and flies in a glass vitrine without formaldehyde.Were there any other reasons the Chinese authorities shut down the piece that you are aware of? You mentioned something to the effect of the decision being based on little more than whim.

Picasso said, Art is the lie that reveals truth. I tend to agree with this assessment. However, the use of real objects like human and animal remains, consitutes a perplexing turn of events in the realm of contemporary art practice that may have even surprised Marcel Duchamp.  I wish to give credit to those artists who execute such work and the creative space in which to do so. Olifi conveyed his message about gender and race in spite of the dung; however, many people chose to focus on the more prurient aspects of the work. Olifi knows what kind of society he lives in--a sadly repressed post-Puritanical nation of overly consumerist under-educated people. Artists such as Hirst and Olifi, even Whiteread, have their work cut out for them. The masses are asleep in this part of the world--or, baffled by the age in which they live.

Yet, there must be a limit. I am one who will never accept Riefenstahl's film work of the Third Reich as "art." I feel the same way about Sun Yuan, especially if the battle for "outrage" among Chinese curators in Beijing turns out to be true (See The Art Newspaper, No. 97, November 1999, page 28). Art that has lost its direction is not art--for me, anyway. I have to say that time does prove such art as a waste or as a true contribution, since, because too few people are even aware of art, much less extreme avant-garde art. I can only look to the future to see how much of an impact the artist's work has made and to see if they have changed the world for the better, opened someone's eyes to some kind of "truth" that had heretofore escaped our grasp. The US is a media savvy culture, but sadly lacking in historical awareness, and perhaps even a moral center. This moral center need not be based in one religion over another. How many of you know that the human remains Sun Yuan used, he used without the permission of the next of kin? Does it not strike a chord with you? If Yuan's art is to be considered as such, let is be considered as mean-spirited. I give him credit for not hiding behind the medium of photography as Andres Serrano had in his work Piss Christ. But, that is also my own humble opinion.

In the final analysis, this work need not be censored, but responded to by the people, not the government. If my response to Hirst is favorable in many cases (though not all) and condemning of Riefenstahl, Serrano or Yuen, that is my right. I only want this right to be available to us all. Opinions keep art alive--censorship kills art.

Susan
Asian Art News
World Sculpture News