An insidious form of censorship

L Stewart

The bare principles espoused by the author are, on first examination, unexceptionable. More than other forms of endevour, real art cannot exist when unable to explore beyond mainstream thinking; and especially when there exists through state-imposed laws or conformist thinking, an "overly sensitive suppression of anything that even brushes against those boundaries".

Dominic Cooke is, however, being ingenuous when he states that "examples are rare" of liberals exercising self-censorship "out of a fear of appearing racist, and with shared sympathy for many of the political causes that also motivate those with a fundamentalist agenda"; to say nothing of routinely treating the moral sensibilities of immigrant communities with much greater reticence than those of the indigeneous British population.

The content of works such as 'Jerry Springer - The Opera' go well beyond 'brushing' against any boundaries, and plunge viciously into a welter of deliberately blasphemous, thoroughly pornographic words & imagery. A Christ who claims to be a bit 'gay', uses foul language, strikes women, and is portrayed as linked to a character who wears nappies and derives sexual pleasure from defecating in them ? God dubbed the "fascist on high"; Mary whose conception arises through rape, or is a complete mistake? Eve who appears to be trying to masturbate Jesus ? Presumably the writer will somehow claim 'artistic merit' for such calculatingly offensive garbage; but to any reasonable person - who need not be "small-minded","bigoted"
or "self-righteous" - or even a devout Christian - it conveys nothing worthwhile at all.
In comparison, the content of plays such as 'Behtzi' and 'Now Or Later' are far milder in tone, and treat the peripheral elements of individual behaviour rather than the central belief of Hindu or Muslim.

Part of this duplicitous behaviour may be, as Mr Cooke observed, "a result of a genuine safety threat". Criticism of Islam is likely to produce a fatwa, and criticism of the Hindu faith "violent protests" and "credible threats of violence" against theatre staff; long-suffering British Christians limit themselves to peaceful picketing, and are usually ignored. But such self-censorship by the Leftist art world is merely a reflection of the Leftist state censorship imposed with equal hypocrisy, in terms of which Muslims gloating over mass murder and explicitly calling for more of the same are assisted by the police to carry their message through the capital, while the leader of the BNP is twice prosecuted for 'race hatred' (in terms of a law prescribing that the truth is no defence) when merely stating facts about Islamic abuse, and advocating a peaceful solution through the polls.

Brian Taylor

Alas, yet another downside of multicultarilism with ethnic minorities blind to our broad heritage of satire and unfettered commentary on the human condition. They will always say, yes, let's have free speech as long as it's not OFFENSIVE.

JohnAnt

I'd be a little keener to espouse the cause of free speech in the theatre, if we already had it outside the theatre.

David Preiser

There's one key element here that you've got backwards: it's not at all brave to do a statue of Christ with an erection. Easiest thing in the world these days. Sticking one's head into the mouth of an invalid, toothless tiger isn't exactly the height of artistic courage.

It's a bit unfair to evoke Rushdie, as he isn't even the most prominent example of Muslim attempts at censorship, nor is he the most recent, or most tragic. No one's life was in actual danger because of the Jerry Springer opera, nor would Koh have to worry about anything except perhaps cheap hors d'oeuvres at the reception.

Comparing any outcry from offended Christians to the fatwa against Rushdie is fatuous. Especially considering that the fatwa against Theo van Gogh was actually taken to its ultimate conclusion. The British media and art world engage in severe self-censorship all the time to prevent any criticism of Islam, yet allow free criticism of Christian beliefs or make Christians of certain beliefs the butt of jokes. Speaking similarly of Islam is forbidden. Yet, that would truly be the brave act you're hoping to support here.

Don't censor Koh, or anything that offends religion. But please, don't pretend that offending Christians is brave.

r.krishan

in u.k. you can offend christians, but have to fear the islamic reaction to any word, picture ,or, opinion. in one country it is amust for the so called majority to perpetually apologise for existing. a witer has called appeasement as "starategic accomadtion. courage lost everything lost.

john

The example of response to the Christ statue is surely not one of the ascendancy of artistic value but of the decline of religious respect. Note that I do not opt for either, but I note that the author seems to have. Precisely what is masquerading as liberalism here?