Following the furore over photographs in the Saatchi Gallery, should art be subject to censorship

A. Issues of censorship and limitations on individual freedom of expression must rank among the most difficult areas to legislate upon and police in any liberal democracy. The central question is: Who decides what is or isn't fit for public consumption, and should we take any notice As the old saying goes 'one man's meat is another man's poison.' Or, more pertinent to a recent piece of censorship in this country, 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.'

�

Perceptions of what is injurious to the public health change over time. The obvious example is the thirty-year ban on the publication of D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterly's Lover. When the go ahead to publish legally in Britain was granted in 1960, the ruling was a landmark in the broadening of the nation's understanding of what could be accepted as art. It has even been suggested that the decision marked the beginning of the permissive society. But few now would read the novel with so much as hint of a blush.

�

Q. What exactly was all the fuss at the Saatchi Gallery about
A. The exhibition I Am a Camera at the Saatchi Gallery in London came under the scrutiny of the authorities after a campaign by the News of the World. The paper condemned the exhibition as 'a revolting exhibition of perversion under the guise of art' and demanded its closure.

�

The allegations of 'child porn centred on three photographs featuring naked children. Two were the work of Tierney Gearon, who used her children as models, and one was by the controversial American photographer Nan Goldin. The News of the World has a ongoing policy of 'naming and shaming' paedophiles, and the paper's campaign against the Saatchi Gallery came about as part of this. The Metropolitan Police decided to investigate, denounced the pictures as obscene and demanded that they be taken down before the gallery re-opened. Charles Saatchi refused.

�

After a visit to the exhibition by a member of the Crown Prosecution Service, it was deemed that the police didn't have a good enough case and it was recommended that the matter be dropped.

�

Q. Was it pornography
A. Not according to the artists, most of the liberal press or the Culture Secretary, Chris Smith. Gearon said: 'They have polluted my pictures. There are now a lot of people who are disturbed by my photos.' One argument runs that images such as this only become pornographic if that is the perception brought to it by the viewer. Another suggests that an image is only pornographic�if that is the intention of the artist or photographer.

�

The NSPCC stated in relation to this incident that child nudity per se was not an issue; problems arose when the subject was forced to pose or when an otherwise innocent picture was used for sexual gratification.

�

Q. What about the ramifications of art censorship
A. Charles Saatchi is no stranger to controversy over work in his collection. The�Sensation exhibition ran into problems in New York when prominent figures, including the mayor�Rudolph Giuliani, were offended by a picture of the Virgin Mary by Chris Offili,�which included elephant dung in its composition.

�

Almost anything is likely to offend somebody, whether on religious, racial, moral or political grounds, and art is no exception. Is it an individual's right to express themselves however they feel best suits their purpose, or has society the right or duty to lay down boundaries

�

Extreme and dangerous examples of performance art, by artists such as�Marina Abramovic, are allowed within the confines of the work, but the same activities would probably invite a referral to a psychiatrist if done in the workplace. Popular songs and artists have a long history of censorship, from NWA back through Let's Spend the Night Together by the Rolling Stones (they were asked to sing 'time' instead of 'night' on American TV), but all it seems to do is swell their popularity.

�

State control leads to an emasculation of the arts, but there will always be cogent arguments for the protection of the public, particularly children, from the artistic expression of others; it's a question of who sets the criteria and by what authority.

�

To ask more Arts & Literature questions, click here

�

By Simon Smith