My book is a 29-essay pamphlet assembled by my Freshman Inquiry professor Jamie Ross. Jamie named the pamphlet with our class name, UNST 192/193G- The Work of Art. As this was never an official title, I will refer to the book as “Jamie’s Pamphlet” instead. The essays from Jamie’s Pamphlet examine the external issues surrounding art, like censorship, racism, and conformity. Each one has a different topic and contains enough information to function as a stand-alone document. Most examine the external issues surrounding a specific art medium. It is impossible to condense these essays into a single concept without neglecting important details from each one. Therefore, I will only evaluate a narrow selection of essays concerning censorship.
I find censorship particularly compelling because I strongly object to its use. Yet I also want to explore why societies find it necessary to censor art. Both communities and governments have restricted artistic content in the past, and may continue to do so in the future. Even if the artwork is controversial, banning or restricting it is a blatant violation of freedom of expression. Limiting information available to the public or punishing artists that preach an unpopular opinion can be just as harmful. Society should develop a greater tolerance to content they find offensive or objectionable.
I will address one censorship-related concept per essay by illustrating the concept through iconography, and supporting my illustrations by highlighting selections from the text. If possible, I want to make the iconography ironic and slightly humorous. There is also a slight chance that I might revise the motifs of a few essays before I begin illustrating the book.
I will analyze and illustrate five of the 29 essays. I will start the book by evaluating the ideas George Moss has presented throughout his essay, Beauty without Sensuality. I will particularly focus on Moss’s insightful theory that societies often regard immoral artworks as a direct attack on their moral values and harmonious lifestyle. On the first page, I will paint a nude man emerging from a large picture frame while cocking a rifle. A 1950’s-esque group of young women in front of the picture frame will gasp in shock at the sight. The interaction between the man and the group of women illustrates the perceived assault that immoral artwork is making on society.
Using the next essay, Culture Shock: Hollywood censored, I will illustrate how morality-based organizations censor objectionable artwork to prevent it from negatively influencing society. They do everything necessary to keep “harmful” artwork out of the public sphere, unable to accept art that blatantly violates their moral values. I will illustrate this chapter with a modified version of the three wise monkeys. The blind and deaf monkeys will remain unchanged, but the third monkey will “repel evil” instead of “speaking no evil” or “doing no evil.” It creates a crucifix with its index fingers to repel the perceived evil, imitating the church’s desire to restrict offensive art. Additionally, while they believe these artworks will have a negative impact, there are no official statistics proving it. I will expand these ideas through Jeff Chang’s essay, Can’t Stop Won’t Stop.
Dudziak’s essay about Josephine Baker’s musical career and Piotr Gwiazda’s essay about Amiri Baraka’s controversial poetry reveal that governments can “censor” artists by silencing them. Artists that promote unpopular, controversial, or unpatriotic views risk being silenced. American artists are no exception, despite their supposed “protection” under the constitution. Worse yet, both Amiri Baraka and Josephine Baker were American artists. I want to emphasize that silencing ANY American (including American artists) is unconstitutional, which I achieve through an illustration of the constitution getting consumed by flames, revealing the word “forbidden” and a chained silhouette behind it.
I will paint all of my illustrations with gouache. The pamphlet’s paper is too thin and fragile to hold water-based paint, so I will create a sturdier canvas by gluing unneeded sections of pages together. Once I finish creating the altered book, the reader will be able to browse through it like a picture book. I will also need to design a new cover, if possible. Jamie’s pamphlet is presently stored in a three ring binder, which is both ugly and impossible to modify.
Before I start the project, I will read the censorship-related essays a final time to ensure perfect comprehension. Then I will revise and expand my approach with external research, because I made several assumptions during the design stage to match the concepts in my text. For what reasons will people censor artwork? How do these reasons change from incident to incident? Who decides to censor an art piece, and does the censor also change? Are there common themes among censored or banned art? How often do censors punish artists because of the opinions they have expressed through their work? Are situations like Josephine Baker’s and Amiri Baraka’s common? Depending on the answers I find, I may need to revise the details of my altered book.
