the impression of the artist while still retaining the aesthetic value.
As a means of expression, the artist often exploits his creativity by encoding the message
in his work in an abstract form. This makes it challenging to hold up the artist to a clearly
stated message in his works.
But at what point do we say an artist has pushed his freedom of artistic expression beyond
the bounds of good taste?
No scenario plays this out better than that of a recent exhibition of a painting of the South
African president Jacob Zuma at the Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg South Africa.
The work by an artist Brett Murray depicts Mr Zuma in acrylic with the genitals hanging out.
The President has recently just got married to his fourth wife amidst controversies.
As expected the work has generated mixed reactions from the public, with Mr Zuma suing the artist
and the gallery, for violating his right to dignity.
His party, ANC, went further to instruct their lawyers to approach the courts to compel the gallery
to remove the portrait from display as well as from their website and destroy all printed
promotional materials on it.
Drawing a corollary from this, i could not help but ponder on what such would have generated
in such a clime as that of Nigeria.
Imagine walking into a gallery in Lagos and the first beautiful artwork that adorn the walls
is one of this sort, in an artistic representation of a public figure, probably a state governor or even the president too. What would be your first reaction?
No comments:
Post a Comment