Rant 24: Political Correctness

you are here: dialogue > webzine > rant 24: political correctness

Rant 24: Political Correctness

This week resident ranter Charlie Levine asks whether we should view deliberately provocative images or if the use of such images simply encourages bad taste. What do you think?

Contributed by: Charlie Levine

The views expressed in the rant are those of Charlie Levine and forum contributors and unless specifically stated are not those of Axis. See Axis terms of use
Womb, 2005
Robin Cracknell Womb, 2005
view more details

Richard Prince's image of a naked Brooke Shields has recently been removed from Tate Modern's latest show Pop Life after police read about its display in a newspaper and felt the need to investigate and remove the image.

I must say the photograph of Brooke was taken when she was ten years old, covered in 80's style make-up, so I can see their concern. It would be naive of us, as visitors, and Tate, as the facilitators of such an image, not to be aware of the current trend for all things paedophilic [sic] to result in a phenomenal reaction. And as the media provokes ever-growing concerns for child abuse through its regular coverage of stories regarding children, their neglect and people of blame, one must conclude that the Tate, through all their bureaucracy and form filling, must have been aware of the controversy that would surround this particular image. Surely art can still shock and provoke reaction without having to be quite so blatant? Or can it?

Have we become immune to such images due to the regularity of horror stories in the news and the availability of information on the internet?

Was Tate just showing the work to make visitors confront the fears of the masses? Should we be made to see and react to this image? Is it good to confront or is it encouraging 'bad taste'?

FURTHER INFORMATION

www.tate.org.uk
Charlie Levine on Axis

add a new commentadd a new comment
Posted by
tabitha sims
Post #1
Posted on 09 October 2009
i actually think this is a really beautiful image, and did not immediately read the age of the subject. as a 41 year old female with thus so far no sexual inclinations towards children, either male or female, do i now need to accept i am a pedophile?

Posted by
Aoife
Post #2
Posted on 09 October 2009
To Tabitha R. Sims: The image above is not the image of Brooke Shields talked about that was removed from the Tate. Look it up and start again. In terms of viewing provocative images is not about good or bad taste. Good or bad is not only subjective it has much more scope than being simply provocative. I like provocative work. But there are infinite ways to make provocative work. We use our own ideas of what we like and don't like as artists, curators and collectors to decide what we expose. Besides our personal taste I think we should consider other factors. My only criteria for this would be that the subject is not being harmed or exploited in a way that will damage them or that they have no control or understanding of the image and its use. This is not always clear and of course we could debate about various examples but in the case of child exploitation it is much clearer and we should not be afraid to have boundaries.

Post #3
Posted on 09 October 2009
It is interesting to consider the effect that images from another "era", chronologically or culturally, can inflict on contemporary attitudes but can we learn anything positive from showing these images?, can the past really form critical comparisons to our lives today ? were they exhibited to provoke their confiscation? Perhaps the action of confiscation imbues a meaning to the artist's action or to the images that they would otherwise be devoid of. What does Brooke Shields think?

Posted by
Lucy Gibson
Lucy Gibson's curator profile image

Post #4
Posted on 14 October 2009
Here is some further reading on the development of this story; the removal of the image and its replacement, plus the legal questions over the potential for the Tate to lose £320,000 in printing costs for the exhibition brochure and the threat to put senior Tate figures on the Sex Offenders Register: http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Richard-Prince-photo-withdrawal-not-in-public-interest”/19595


Axis logo
Copyright Axis 1999-2010 unless stated otherwise. No reproduction of text or media without written permission. For terms and conditions visit www.axisweb.org/copyright.