Null 1

Logan Null

Ms. Gardner

English 10H/Period 5

2 May 2018

Art: Parental Guidance Suggested

Killed Cartoons​. A compilation, put together by David Wallis, of editorial cartoons

that have been rejected (or in his words, “killed”) by newspapers worldwide, comments on the

spreading issue of art censorship. Art censorship is any suppression of a work of art - painted,

written, filmed, or sung - due to the fact that it might be seen as insulting or controversial.

Wallis’s book’s full title, ​Killed Cartoons: Casualties from the War on Free Expression​, presents

the problem at hand: the censorship of art attacks artists’ freedom of expression, sending the

message to the general public that freedom of expression is unacceptable. The country then

ignores all other viewpoints except the ones given by the government and reluctantly accepted by

society. By hindering artists’ ability to express themselves freely, it would seem that the

government, in many cases, is violating the First Amendment rights of many. The censorship of

art should not be embraced, as art provides a helpful approach to solving current issues, teaches

history, and promotes freedom of expression.

It’s true: much of the art that goes on to be censored can be seen as insulting or

controversial to some. However, art’s purpose is just that: it stares controversial issues right in

the eyes, and confronts them when no one else will. For example, an article by Rosie DiManno,

journalist for the ​Toronto Star​, discusses a piece of art hanging in the student center at York

University which depicts “a male figure wearing a keffiyeh emblazoned with the map of a
 Null 2

borderless Israel and holding two stones behind his back as he gazes upon what is presumably a

Jewish settlement under construction.” This presents quite a controversial issue, and one ripe for

diplomatic discussion. Unfortunately, Paul Bronfman, a regular donor of the university, showed

“outrage” towards this painting’s “anti-Israel” imagery, and instead of questioning it, he

withdrew all support from the university's Cinema and Media Arts program (DiManno). Also, in

David Wallis’s ​Killed Cartoons​, many of the editorial cartoons that have been rejected by

newspapers touch on very important and relevant issues, such as terrorism, social injustice, and

government corruption, to name a few. In both of these examples, the censors do not see that the

point of these works of art is to show the pressing issues that need to be dealt with. Art can be

used to inform people about uncomfortable truths that would not be addressed unless artists had

the bravery to do so. Opponents of art should realize that they should not be worried about the

insulting pieces of art, but should be focused on the current controversial issues they depict.

Art does not just confront present issues. Past problems in history are kept alive in

society’s mind through the work of artists, yet the battle to keep history from being buried by

censors rages on. Jenna Portnoy, a writer for the ​Washington Post​, reports that citizens in

Virginia called for a law allowing parents to restrict their kids from reading certain books in high

school. In this particular case, the target is Toni Morrison’s novel on the “destructive legacy of

slavery,” ​Beloved​, as described by Cathy Lowne of the Encyclopædia Britannica. Parents

reasoned that this novel was “too graphic” for their teens to be reading, completely overlooking

the fact that the book’s message about slavery as a whole is an essential part of history that

cannot be forgotten (Portnoy). Censorship does not just stop at America’s embarrassing past, as

Preti Taneja, of ​The Washington Post​, talks about in her article, “Should Shakespeare be
 Null 3

Censored?” It is clear from the title that this article expresses the concerns of many regarding the

great playwright’s material. Shakespeare’s plays “contain anti-Semitism, racism and sexism,

sexual abuse and violence,” and some believe that this is a need for censorship (Taneja).

Historical documents, which Shakespeare’s plays can be classified as, should not be censored

just because the past might be too sensitive for some, as they are an important part of history.

Another example of sensitive history being censored so that it cannot insult people is the

recent replacement of the famous “Take a wench for a bride” scene in the Pirates of the

Caribbean ride at Disney Parks. Where once the scene depicted the auctioning-off of a redheaded

woman to pirates, the new watered-down scene portrays the same redhead, who is now a female

pirate, “forcing citizens of the raided town to surrender their wares to the invaders,” according to

Los Angeles Times​ journalist Todd Martens. This transition from an auction of women to an

auction of goods portrays to guests of the parks that the unimportant past should be ignored if it

seems to be too much to handle. Without art, history will be buried and the customs of those

times (good or bad) will be forgotten. The world will forget what was once unacceptable and

begin to make the same mistakes again if it is not constantly reminded of them. Works of art help

the world to remember the inhumane acts of humanity in the past so that they can never happen

again in the future.

If the different viewpoints on issues, present and past, are not presented to the world, then

the opportunity for freedom of expression, and ultimately of new ideas, is stripped away. It says

it in the title of Wallis’s novel: these censored pieces of art are “​Casualties from the War on Free

Expression​.” The First Amendment rights of theses cartoonists are being taken away as soon as

their pen is; they are not allowed to express themselves. One of the rejected cartoons featured in
 Null 4

Killed Cartoons​, by Phil Somerville, sparked a controversy after it was rejected by Somerville’s

editor, who claimed it was “inciting hatred against America.” Somerville then sent the cartoon,

which was a piece marking the first anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center, to a

TV show called ​Media Watch​, which posted the cartoon online and asked viewers to give their

opinion on the controversy (167-168). One sarcastic reader commented: “Does Andrew Hornery

[Somerville’s editor] fear reprimand from the Ministry of Love? Or perhaps he is also employed

at MiniTrue, as an agent of the Thought Police” (qtd. in Wallis). It was clear to this reader that

Somerville’s very thoughts on a certain topic were being censored, and it should be clear to

everyone that the First Amendment right of freedom of expression is not as enforced as it should

be.

Five years ago, outrage over a pop artist’s freedom of expression emerged. Writer for ​The

Guardian​, Dorian Lynskey, explains in his article, “What’s Wrong with being Sexy?” how in

2013, over 20 student unions across UK universities banned Robin Thicke’s song, “Blurred

Lines.” Their reasoning was that, when closely examined, the song seems to be about date rape

(Lynskey). Thicke’s song, which is produced by Pharrell Williams - famous for the innocent

song from the animated film ​Despicable Me 2​, “Happy” - is not meant to resemble anything

more than a catchy beat to dance to, and the trivial lyrics are not meant to be overanalyzed.

When compared to most other pop songs of today, all of which are chock-full of innuendos and

sexually-charged lyrics, ​Blurred Lines​ is not more of an offense than any other song of another

artist wanting to express their frisky, scandalous side. If every work of art which expresses ideas

coming from “outside of the box” is cracked down upon, then the same old beliefs will be

expressed by the elite minority, while being imposed onto the restrained majority of people. The
 Null 5

promotion of freedom of expression through art is vital, especially in today’s society with so

many new perspectives on the world emerging each day.

Even while promoting freedom of expression and creativity, some art can be perceived as

dangerous or unjust by many, and for good reason. Art should never make one feel unsafe, and it

should never be displayed at the cost of another’s safety. For example, an article by ​The New

York Times​ journalist David Xu Borgonjon titled “The Art of Destroying an Artwork,” tells how

works of art from the Guggenheim Museum in 2017 were removed after “intense protests.” The

exhibit included live animals into a “sculptural vitrine” and angered animal rights organizations

(Borgonjon). This censorship is justified: the possibility for the discomfort or endangerment of

animals was possible here. Another case is circuses. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of

Animals) has a post on their website titled “Circuses: Three Rings of Abuse,” which outlines the

poor treatment of animals in circuses, from beatings to tightly enclosed cages. Of course, this

physically abusive aspect of this performance art is unacceptable, and reasonably, PETA urges

people to visit circuses without animals, such as Cirque du Soleil (“Circuses: Three Rings of

Abuse”). Art can go to extremes of making people (or animals) feel unsafe or be put into unsafe

situations, for the benefit of the show. Obviously, the endangerment of anyone or any animal

should never be allowed just for art; however, the censorship of works that can in no way hurt

anyone is absurd. Until the redheaded animatronic at Disneyland actually starts firing her gun at

guests, or pop artists start performing lyrical adaptations of ​Mein Kampf​, there is no reason to be

upset over art that is simply controversial.

The censorship of art is not justified, as art confronts current issues, portrays past

problems, and promotes the freedom of expression. Without different art from all over the world,
 Null 6

the ideals and values of society will be “plastic” and unfair to many. The censorship of art tells

younger generations to be unimaginative, uncreative. Censoring art likens governments to

toddlers: they see something they do not like, and the way they deal with it is to cover their ears

and start screaming, ignoring the issue at hand altogether. The world cannot get better without

these issues being brought forth. The controversial must be discussed in order to find a balanced

world, and that can only happen when more artists step forward. Thus, get out a paintbrush, pen,

or piano, and be provocative.

 Null 7

Works Cited

Borgonjon, David Xu. “The Art of Destroying an Artwork.” ​The New York Times​, The New

York

Times, 25 Oct. 2017,

www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/opinion/guggenheim-artwork-animals-racism.html.

"Circuses: Three Rings of Abuse." ​PETA​,

www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/animals-used-entertainment-factsheets/cir

cuses-tree-rings-abuse/. Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.

DiManno, Rosie. "Donors Shouldn't Stifle Provocative Art."​ Toronto Star​, 30 Jan, 2016, pp. A.2​.

SIRS Issues Researcher​, https://sks.sirs.com. Accessed 18 Apr. 2018.

Lowne, Cathy. "Beloved." ​Encyclopædia Britannica​, 8 Feb. 2017,

www.britannica.com/topic/Beloved-novel-by-Morrison. Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.

Lynskey, Dorian. "What's Wrong with being Sexy?" The Guardian, 14 Nov, 2013, pp. 4. SIRS

Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com. Accessed 18 Apr. 2018.

Martens, Todd. "‘We Wants the Redhead’? Disney Fans Get Vocal over Pirates of the Caribbean

Change at D23 Expo." ​Los Angeles Times​, 15 July 2017,

www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-hc-d23-pirates-complaints-20170715-story.

html. Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.

Portnoy, Jenna. "Virginia Book Bill is Vetoed."​ Washington Post​, 05 Apr, 2016, pp. B.1​. SIRS

Issues Researcher​, https://sks.sirs.com. Accessed 18 Apr. 2018.

Taneja, Preti. "Should Shakespeare be Censored?"​SIRS Issues Researcher​, 05 Mar, 2015,

https://sks.sirs.com. Accessed 18 Apr. 2018.

 Null 8

Wallis, David, editor. ​Killed Cartoons: Casualties from the War on Free Expression​. New York,

W. W. Norton & Company, 2007.