Document page
Publicasso 2025 26(Art and Media)printed 10 · PDF 12
20 pagesrevision 51100
printed 10 · PDF 12
Page image rendered from the stored file at 110 dpi; it sharpens as you zoom. Outlines are placed from each region’s stored position on the page (596 × 842 pt).
readable
Source of this text: embedded text layer. The better of the embedded text and OCR is kept.
10
Who Decides What
Art Can Say?
By: Ali Arif Piracha
For decades, art has been one universal language
through which ideas and sentiments are expressed.
However, it has continually turned into an
intersection of controversy and clamping down.
The topic that sparks the most arguments for most
modern artists, though, is censorship, which is the
societal cutting off point between artistic freedom
and that which is socially unacceptable, offensive,
or dangerous.
Artists both today and in the past, have never shied
away from challenging the
established norms.
Discussing pieces
like Gustave Courbet’s
sensationalism in
L’Origine du Monde or Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ
sparks endless debates around whether art has
limits. Today, the controversies are amplified. Any
artistic work now has an outrageous amount of
instant access and can be critiqued and judged
globally within a short period.
Censorship in art, artists claim, must not exist. It is
said to be the duty of an artist to provoke thought,
even if it is in the most discomforting manner.
Citing Ai Weiwei, they explain that such an artist is
a contemporary champion because he uses his
works
to
expose
the
lies
of
the
Chinese
government, and he, along with many other truth-
seeking activists, defends the rights of the
oppressed. Most, if not all of them, maintain that
censoring art ignores the voices that need to be
amplified, especially. those representing minority
life or political dissent.
But some people think otherwise. Others think
there should be boundaries. In most instances, art
containing
nudity,
religious
defamation,
or
political themes is withdrawn from galleries or
banned altogether. Some are concerned that some
pieces have the potential to spread hate, glorify
violence, or offend sacred beliefs. For instance,
Dana Schutz's Emmett Till painting at the 2017
Whitney Biennial caused huge controversy. Some
critics raised doubts about whether a white artist
was entitled to depict the pain of Black Americans
in such a sensitive subject. Was this freedom of
expression, or was it cultural appropriation?
What adds to the complexity of this problem
is that "offensive" is in the eye of the
beholder. What one culture honors,
another may consider very insulting. So
who
gets
to
say
what
art
goes
too
far?
Governments? Museums? Social media sites?
As an art student myself, I sometimes ask: how do
we respect at the same time that we allow for
creativity? Art must challenge and make us feel,
even if that feeling is painful. But I also get why
people get offended by some images or concepts.
Perhaps
the
true
solution
isn't
to
censor
contentious art, but to discuss it more freely.
Rather than shutting it down, we can take those
opportunities
to
have
hard
but
necessary
conversations.
Ultimately, the discussion of censorship in art isn't
disappearing anytime soon. As the world gets more
progressive, so will our parameters of what's
deemed acceptable. But one thing is for sure, and
that is that art will continue to show us our
struggles, our values, and our voices, even if they
are in conflict.
Sources
debatingmatters.com — Art Censorship
theguardian.com — Ai Weiwei: The Artwork that Made Me the Most Dangerous Person in China
Publicasso