Recently a controversy around the display of some artwork on the EPCOR Centre’s +15 erupted, resulting in EPCOR erecting a wall in front of the artwork, thereby allowing those who wished to view the work to do so and those who found the work too disturbing, or offensive, to continue on their way along the +15 undisturbed. The controversy highlighted the age-old question, “what is art?”, and what are the rights of artists to produce and exhibit their art versus the rights of the public to not view that which it finds disturbing or transgressive.
Representatives of the artistic side of this debate, Eric Moschopedis of Bubonic Tourist, Anthea Black of the stride Gallery, and Keith Murray of TRUCK Gallery, recently offered their perspective on the issues this controversy raised. EPCOR was not approached, as the writer of this piece felt it important to give voice in a queer publication to those working within a queer cultural perspective.
Much has been made of the “censorship” angle in both mainstream and alternative media, with the attendant defensiveness such accusations usually entail. Did anything positive come out of this? Did this incident offer an opportunity for greater dialogue between artists and corporate interests that often help fund or supply venues for those artists?
Moschopedis believes the controversy was, ultimately, quite positive.
“When nearly one hundred people showed up for the [Bubonic Tourist] public forum and almost unanimously ‘stood up’ for the expression of the artist…I think there was a message sent to EPCOR Centre that this cannot happen again,” said Moschopedis.
“Unfortunately, the conversations that were held were not necessarily about the work, but the censorship of the work. Sometimes you can’t control the vehicle that drives people to actively and critically engage about art.”
Black feels any attention brought to bear on arts issues is good and is pleased about the increased communication and collaboration between the various arts groups the controversy fostered.
“It has strengthened my resolve to keep presenting the kind of work that challenges boundaries, and reaffirmed the importance and impact presenting this work has,” Black noted. “I am working on a few projects that might cause similar reactions. It’s good to have gone through a ‘trial run’ dealing with controversy and find out who your allies are.”
Murray noted art has rarely been the focus of discussion, rather it was the debate around the works themselves that garnered the attention, not the worth or message of the works.
“It depresses me that all the media glory was for the battle, and not for the cause,” Murray said. “Art has rarely been the focus of discussion, especially any address of Edie Fake’s work, despite its pertinent hold on the issue at hand.”
“I am not very optimistic about people’s attention spans. I don’t know how many Calgarians are going to stick around and address the skeletons that artists point out in our cultural closet,” he added. “However, at least we are in the process of trying to negotiate a structure for when these potential public ‘collisions’ occur in the future. That is an important step.”
“I hope, in the future, the EPCOR Centre will choose not to police the voice of artists, but support artists in enhancing the cultural climate of Calgary by allowing us to programme works that may, and probably will again, challenge public preconceptions.”
Not known as an epicentre for challenging or cutting-edge art, Calgary is, culturally, very much a corporate town with a strong suburban influence. One of the mandates of -Bubonic Tourist is to expose Calgarians to queer artists and queer cultural concepts.
Black points out the initial complaints were not about the cartoon-like masturbatory imagery of Edie Fake’s “Gaylord Phoenix in the Flower Temple” but, rather, the imagery of dead and bleeding dogs in the “Terminal Modern” pieces.
“The most vocal comments were about ’dead animals‘ then, all of a sudden, it was not just ’dead animals,’ but ’queer sex‘ too. A double taboo.”
Both Murray and Moschopedis were “more disappointed and disheartened” than surprised by the controversy.
“Edie’s work depicts a safe and healthy sex act,” Moschopedis pointed out. “It is ironic and cartoonish…there isn’t anything in the work I would consider contentious.”
Murray is more direct. “It really sickens me to think our culture is still offended and ashamed by what is natural and pleasurable. In our very privileged age, where information and access to truth is readily available, it disturbs me so many of us still choose ignorance.”
“It makes me even more upset that people actually choose belief systems that oppress their sexuality and install in them a morbid fear of death,” he said. “Why else would people react so strongly to a cartoon image of a bird-man masturbating and a few dead animals? I applaud Fake and Hepburn for challenging our oppressive belief structures and for bringing attention to the strong hold those beliefs have on our civic-cultural consciousness.”
Black continued by saying that while Calgary is not known for queer art, the artist-run centres have worked to present queer art, and art by queer artists.
“The artist-run centres are one of the few places that are very open to showing queer work,” Black said. “Queers in Alberta - and Canada - still get yelled at or queer-bashed for looking a ‘certain way,’ or for displaying public affection towards each other. I always expect queer cultural expression to cause the same kind of backlash that simply existing does. When queers get ‘out of line,’ it usually means ‘too visible.’ Straight culture always finds ways to police this – through violence, censorship, or social/cultural/political coercion.”
But was what EPCOR’s action really ‘censorship’? Moschopedis is very clear that, in his opinion, it was.
“Altering the presentation and appearance of an artist’s work due to content – that is censorship,” he said. “True, works weren’t removed, but to believe the works weren’t altered is naïve. Would it be censorship if there were a black bar across the tube/penis in Gaylord Phoenix? We don’t need to have works burned or smashed to consider what happened to be censorship. When an organization of power begins to spin and politically doctor what they have done, like referring to the wall as a ‘screen’, they are trying to soften the language and the image of their handiwork.”
Murray argued that, as a programmer and artist representative, as well as an artist and ‘androphilic Homo Sapien male’, he believes himself to be “very sensitive to the public sphere.” Adding, “If being sensitive to the public sphere means limiting, or censoring, freedom of expression, then I will happily be a 40-foot-tall, neon-pink peacock, with a bullhorn, shouting until those rights are respected.”
Murray went on to raise some interesting questions around what constitutes good taste in art and what is appropriate for public consumption.
“Is it mountain landscapes and bronze-cast cowboys? TRUCK’s mandate is dedicated to the development and public presentation of contemporary art,” Murray pointed out. “To me, that means supporting artistic practices that question and challenge accepted norms, or conventions, of our culture…especially the pathological ones that need to be questioned.”
Black noted the works in question did not even come close to violating obscenity laws.
“Violence in art, or even graphic sex for that matter, certainly has a place. As artists, we make work that responds to our cultural climate. We give a voice to issues that concern, disturb, arouse, excite, challenge, and awe us. Artists have been powerful agents for social change and justice,” she said.
“Of course, the responsibility of the artist is to create a context in which the viewer can approach and critique the subject matter of the work, and the way the artist has created it, in a way that leads to new understandings about our culture.”
Several years ago, Republican interests in the USA challenged the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) funding of photographic works by Robert Mapplethorpe, deemed obscene by some. The controversy around what was ‘art’ and what was ‘pornography’ raged for years and, some believe, had a chilling effect on artistic expression in the USA.
“The arts in the US never fully recovered,” Black said. “When the Mapplethorpe case cooled down, people found new artists and exhibits to scandalize. The funding was decimated. I’ve had colleagues in the States tell me that, because of the new legislation coming out of the NEA controversy, they are ineligible for any NEA funding.”
There has been a ‘spill-over’ effect into Canada. In the 1990s Alberta MLAs such as Ken Kowalski, Stockwell Day, and Gary Mar attempted to introduce a bill banning queer art from being shown in galleries that received public arts funding.
“[That initiative failed] only because of a cabinet shuffle,” said Black. “We were so close to losing funding to produce queer work. The reality is that Alberta is a difficult province in which to be queer. It is also a difficult province in which to be an artist. This combination sometimes proves too challenging for many queers and artists, so many just leave. I call this the ‘Mass Queer Exodus.’”
Adding to Black’s comments, Murray stated, “I almost joined that exodus…but someone has to be on the forefront committed to moving the hard fought frontline forward, battle by battle, until it’s gone.”
“If Calgary wants to be a cultural capital like Toronto or Montreal, then Calgarians should support the creators of culture, the artists, not censor them.”
As a programmer for TRUCK and for the Fairy Tales Gay and Lesbian Film Festival, Murray is constantly looking to bring in cutting-edge and innovative work.
“The loss of so many invaluable voices as they flee to more supportive cities can be amended by programming their work [into the galleries and film festivals] and bring them back…but that is not going to happen if there is no funding or support,” said Murray.
While too young to remember the Mapplethorpe controversy or the threat Kowalski, Day, and Mar presented to alternative art in Alberta, Moschopedis understands the effect social conservatism has on the arts.
“This experience with the Centre is certainly spurring me forward as an artist. I am considering the boundaries and will make certain we blow them wide open. With social conservatism on the rise, it is going to become increasingly important to stand up for our art and artists.”
