7 September 2009

Open letter from Diane Torre to: Steven Purcell, Leader of Glasgow City Council, and Bridget McConnell, Chief Executive of Culture and Sport Glasgow

As a New York artist whose work is included in the sh[OUT] exhibition at the Glasgow Gallery of Modern Art (GoMA), I was impressed by the enlightened attitude of GoMA to create an event dealing with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex culture, as part of GoMA's Contemporary Art and Human Rights social justice series. As this is the 40th Anniversary of  Stonewall it is a very opportune moment to bring public attention to artwork relating to LGBT culture and to the potential of generating dialogue on issues such as homophobia, stigma around people with HIV, and so on. In an environment where there is still much shame around being gay, the experience of acts of gay bashing among the gay population in general, and high rates of suicide among gay youth, this is clearly a much-needed exposure.
 
Unfortunately that opportunity is not to be fully realized, and, as I understand it, has been tainted by Culture and Sport Glasgow (CSG) at the behest of certain Councillors (perhaps you could reveal their names, Steven, as there has been no transparency and therefore no accountability regarding the processes relating to this decision) to censor the work of Spanish artist Dani Marti an artist who works between Sydney and Glasgow, whose films are to be launched on September 11th at GoMA. You can read about this work in a copy of the CSG magazine, Preview, (page 27, top left-hand corner). But to remind you, Dani Marti was commissioned to create artworks with Gay Men's Health Project. In Dani’s own words: "I was horrified at how much people are scared of disclosing their status. I went to a meeting of HIV+ men with the possibility of recording individual's stories about living with HIV in Scotland. Only two people agreed, and then with no images and also having their voices distorted! I was amazed to have the opportunity of two men on SCREEN, in an intimate context, talking about their life, fears, and openly HIV, [it] would have done so much benefit to so so so many individuals across the LGBT and straight community…..I am pretty angry at the whole thing... not because MY WORK has been cancelled... but because THE WORK that is going to bring dialogue, help overcome stigma on HIV... that is going to give people permission to be open about their emotions, feelings and sexuality, has been cancelled."

I was invited to a meeting on Tuesday 1st September 2009 of the Artist Advisory Panel at GoMA. Hosted by Mark O' Neill, Head of Art and Museums at CSG, the meeting was to inform those present that Dani's work was to be withdrawn (= censored) from the exhibition. The main reason we were given was "timing". It appears that because of the response to one exhibit in the exhibition by such right-wing press as the Scottish Daily Mail, and a subsequent 650 letters received by offended members of the public (two-thirds of whom had never seen the exhibit or even visited the exhibition) there had to be some action taken. Poor Dani was the fall-guy. At the meeting, I expressed my outrage at the proposal to censor this work. It is unacceptable that you can just decide at your whim whether work that has been curated can be seen or not. It doesn't matter what the media might say, people (i.e. "the public") have a right to be exposed to art - since when is culture tailor-made to meet the promotional needs of Councillors? The right to freedom of expression is probably the most universally accepted human right. As public servants don’t you think you have a responsibility to ensure these rights are upheld? Political representatives can only understand and represent the views of their constituents through an open, two-way process of airing views, opinions and facts. The interference with the 'arms length' curatorial decisions at GoMA would appear to contravene the artists' rights to freedom of expression protected under the European Convention - Freedom of expression extends to unfavourable information or ideas, as well as those that are popular or inoffensive! I should mention that my sense of outrage and anger at the proposed censorship of Dani Marti's work is informed by my own experience 20 years ago campaigning in New York against the proposed censorship of the work of four artists - Holly Hughes, John Fleck, Tim Miler and Karen Finley - called the NEA4, three of whom were gay. I thought we had moved on from there, but clearly not. In fact, I was informed (threatened?) at the meeting by CSG's own Press Officer that my work could still be "withdrawn" - I am giving a talk on October 22nd at GoMA.

Since the meeting last Tuesday, I have been trying to discover more about the background to the decison of CSG and the City Councillors to censor Dani's work. I heard about the Bible exhibit, that was part of the Faith and Sexuality workshop, in which members of the public who felt they were left out of the Bible were invited to write themselves in. This apparently resulted in such an outpouring of vitriol from the public that the book was defaced - hence the 650 letters sent in protest. Apart from the fact that it was not the artist's intention that the Bible be used as a dumping ground for people's anger, it would seem that the Christian community needs to look at this attack as something they can learn from. One perspective could be that the artist has done the Christian community a service, by alerting them to the strong feelings that people have towards the Bible, and the need for a closer communication and dialogue with a wider public. There is clearly an opportunity for a conversation here.

I asked Dani what was the reason he was given for the withdrawal of this work, and he mentioned that one of the films had already been shown in Zurich (one of the most conservative cities in Europe, I might add) without any problems.  The response he was given from CS Glasgow was that "It's all right for Zurich, but the West of Scotland is not ready."  I was baffled at this remark.  Perhaps you can enlighten me as to when exactly the West of Scotland will be ready? Whatsmore on what is this paternalistic attitude  towards the West of Scotland based?  And now - a question to the West of Scotland - why do you tolerate it? 

I discussed the issue with visiting artists, who were disturbed by this action of censorship and some thought it was absurd.  One German artist who is on exchange was very puzzled and said that this was a discriminatory practice and believed it to be illegal, and should be taken to the European Court. One Dutch artist, who is a bit of a wag, suggested that the Bible exhibit should be locked up and a sign accompanying it saying "for straights only". Another artist suggested that instead of sh[OUT] the exhibition should be called ga[GED].

However, the point is that this is an issue of censorship and as a gay man, Steven, I expect that you are conscious of the potential for homophobic reprisal that such censorship can effect. In Dani's words: "The important thing is to show these films at GoMA, as initially planned. It is important to create dialogue about the stigma on HIV from a platform like that, as initially planned."

I am sending this open letter to The Glasgow Herald but also to other national
and international newspapers. A case of censorship of this kind should be broadcast far and wide. It is intolerable in this culture. On one hand there is the launch of a new late-night comedy on E4 called Rick and Steve: the happiest gay couple in all the world, and meanwhile at Glasgow GoMA there is the censorship of commissioned work by an individual gay filmmaker.

These films must be launched at GoMA on September 11th as advertised.
"Let Glasgow Flourish."

Diane Torr