[an excerpt from the diary of an artist living in Toronto, Canada]
Today my good friend Robert Markle finally had his day in court. About a year ago some of his nude paintings, displayed at Dorothy Cameron's Eros '65 gallery were unfairly confiscated by the supposed "morality police" of our fair city. While Robert would definitely claim to have had every intention of arousing emotions with his art, he always told me he viewed his nude paintings as sensuous rather than sexual. But today, an Ontario court magistrate claimed today that Robert went too far. The nude painting that caused by far the greatest public outcry was of two women in an intimate embrace.
.
[end of exerpt]
While this small moment of gay and lesbian artistic censorship may not initially appear to be of any particular significance, it was these small acts of everyday oppression that silenced gay and lesbian voices and resulted in the need for a full fledged gay rights movement during the 1970s. It is also significant that this issue pertains to issues of art and cultural expression as opposed to legal rights, as these were the kind of issues that impacted gays and lesbians on a day to day basis. Finally this event is significant insofar as it set a precedent that would impact a range of other gay and lesbian artists throughout the 1970s and 1980s.
What do you think about this issue? Was Markle's art pornography? Or freedom of expression?
Watch this clip from the CBC news archives to help practice historical perspective taking and determine your best response:
References:
Photo Entitled Lovers lll by Robert Markle, 1963
Courtesy of the Centre for Contemporary Canadian Art.
Cops ban 'lewd' drawings.
The CBC Digital Archives Website.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Last updated: March 20, 2008.
[Page consulted on Jan. 20, 2011.]
Kinsman, Gary. The Regulation of Desire: Homo and Hetero Sexualities. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1996.
No comments:
Post a Comment