Disasters of Peace Part 2: A student perspective - PULP FICTIONS No.7

Karin Van Marle

Description

In this edition of Pulp fictions two law students reflect on the issues taken up in the first edition of Pulp fictions in 2005. Joel Modiri and Emile Zitzke (both second years in 2011), after reading the dialogue between Heyns and Van Marle last year as first year students coming into the faculty of law were prompted to revisit some of the issues raised. Heyns and Van Marle’s dialogue was in response to a decision of the Centre for Human Rights not to display a group of etchings by Diane Victor from her Disasters of Peace series in their offices and a subsequent decision of the University’s management, taken after the group of etchings had been moved to the Department of Public Law, to remove two of the etchings that were found to be most offensive by a group of complainants including the then principal of the University, Prof Calie Pistorius.Six years after the removal of these art works Modiri and Zitzke bring fresh perspectives to the debate. Added to this edition also is a musing by Prof Christof Heyns.The original idea with Pulp fictions was to open spaces for discussion, dialogue and dissent and opportunity for creativity, experimentation and reimaginings.Over the past 6 years, colleagues from the UP Faculty of Law; from other faculties in UP; and from other universities have participated, as have a judge of the Constitutional Court and an attorney. This is the first edition in which students have entered these spaces. We welcome this expansion and reiterate previous calls for more participation from the UP academic community and beyond.About the Editor:Karin van Marle is a Professor at the Department of Legal History, Comparitive Law and Jurisprudence, at the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria

Sujets

• Economie
• développement
• Politics
• Relations internationales
• Développement
• Géopolitique

Informations

• Publié par: PULP (Pretoria University Law Press)
• Date de parution: 01 janvier 2011
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 2 Mo

Extrait

DISASTERS OF PEACE: PART 2

2011

PULP FICTIONS: DISASTERS OF PEACE: PART 2

Published by: Pretoria University Law Press (PULP) The Pretoria University Law Press (PULP) is a publisher at the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa. PULP endeavours to publish and make available innovative, high-quality scholarly texts on law in Africa that have been peer-reviewed. PULP also publishes a series of collections of legal documents related to public law in Africa, as well as text books from African countries other than South Africa.

For more information on PULP, see www.pulp.up.ac.za

Contact details:

Faculty of Law University of Pretoria South Africa 0002 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] [e-mail] www.pulp.up.ac.za

Printed and bound by: Business Print: [phone]

Cover design: Yolanda Booyzen, Centre for Human Rights

ISSN:1992-5174

2011

‘Made to measure’ by Diane Victor

‘In sheep’s clothing’ by Diane Victor

Editorial

 3

In this edition ofPulp fictionstwo law students reflect on the issues taken up in the first edition ofPulp fictionsin 2005. Joel Modiri and Emile Zitzke (both second years in 2011), after reading the dialogue between Heyns and Van Marle last year as first year students coming into the faculty of law were prompted to revisit some of the issues raised. Heyns and Van Marle’s dialogue was in response to a decision of the Centre for Human Rights not to display a group of etchings by Diane Victor from herDisasters of Peaceseries in their offices and a subsequent decision of the University’s management, taken after the group of etchings had been moved to the Department of Public Law, to remove two of the etchings that were found to be most offensive by a group of complainants including the then principal of the University, Prof Calie Pistorius. Six years after the removal of these art works Modiri and Zitzke bring fresh perspectives to the debate. Added to this edition also is a musing by Prof Christof Heyns.

The original idea withPulp fictions was to open spaces for discussion, dialogue and dissent and opportunity for creativity, experimentation and re- imaginings. Over the past 6 years, colleagues from the UP Faculty of Law; from other faculties in UP; and from other universities have participated, as have a judge of the Constitutional Court and an attorney. This is the first edition in which students have entered these spaces. We welcome this expansion and reiterate previous calls for more participation from the UP academic community and beyond.

Karin van Marle(Editor) Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria

The politics of horror art, freedom of expression and the University as open space

A response to Professors Heyns and van Marle (PULP Fictions: Disasters of peace: An exchange, 2005) 6 years later

1

Joel S.M. Modiri* Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria

Deceptively straightforward, the contemporary visual terrain in westernised, post-industrial cultures is increasingly developing into a complex smorgasbord of visual spectacles available to potential viewers. Discourse dealing with issues arising from this field of the visual, or ‘visual culture’, is evidence of an intellectual acknowledgment that present-day (post-industrial) social, political and cultural life is undeniably entangled with (and complicated by) images ... Recent enquiry into the ideological underpinnings of images in general, as well as the assumption that vision is a learnt 1 activity, has led to new questions being asked in (and of) art history.

Introduction

It comes as no surprise that the pictures reproduced at the beginning of this publication caused a stir in the University of Pretoria’s Faculty of Law five 2 years ago. The decision to display the etchings of artist Diane Victor in the

*

1 2

My sincere thanks to Prof Karin van Marle for her comments and input and to Prof Duard Kleyn and Prof Christof Heyns for discussions and feedback. J Lauwrens‘Sightseeing in art and visual culture’ (2008) 14Image & Text18. ‘Made to measure’ (top) and ‘In sheep’s clothing’ (bottom).

5

6

Centre for Human Rights and the subsequent decision to remove them from the Centre and then from the corridors of the Department of Public Law sparked debate and reflection on the value of art, on freedom of expression and on the crafting of a politics within the Faculty that embraces dissent. In 3 response to this issue, Professors Christof Heyns and Karin van Marle each delivered conceptions of the kind of commitment to and understanding of human rights, democratic ethics and tolerance that should inform our outlook on art and specificallyhorror art,which often has the effect of jolting us out of the false sense of comfort that we have been lulled into and present to us in graphic detail the horrors of life, the realities of injustice, 4 violence and abuse and essentially, the ‘Disasters of Peace’.

In what follows I attempt to show how, even six years on, the artworks are still relevant. The conditions that reproduce sexual violence, hatred, patriarchy, neo-oppression, social anarchy and human misery are alive and well. Diane Victor’s etchings confirm that among us prowl the products of our immoral and amoral past — killers who have no sense of the worth of human life, rapists who have absolute disdain for the women of our country, animals who would seek to benefit from the vulnerability of the children, the disabled and the old, the rapacious who brook no obstacle in the quest for 5 self-enrichment. This proves, to revise an old adage thatpictures speak louder than words. Heyns and Van Marle went further than only the art works themselves, to deal with the process of consultation that was (not) followed in the decision to display the pictures in the Faculty building (whether in the Centre for Human Rights, the corridors or offices in the Department of Public Law or anywhere else for that matter). Heyns stresses that ‘a commitment to democracy and human rights requires that those directly affected should in one way or another be consulted when strong statements are made through

3

4 5

C Heyns ‘In graphic detail. Freedom of expression on campus’ and K van Marle ‘Art, democracy and resistance: A response to Professor Heyns’Disasters of Peace: an exchange(2005) 1Pulp Fictions3 and 15 respectively. This is the official name for a series of artworks by Diane Victor. Thabo Mbeki ‘I am an African’ (1996) Statement of (then) Deputy President TM Mbeki, on behalf of the ANC, on the occasion of the adoption by the Constitutional Assembly of the Republic of South Africa Constitution Bill, 1996, 8 May 1996. Available at http://www.info.gov.za/aboutgovt/orders/ news20220_mbeki.htm.

 7

6 art on their behalf’ while Van Marle insists that ‘[w]e support certain procedures because we are committed to a certain substantive vision of 7 democracy and politics’. The matrix of events that took place in the Faculty, conflicting legal philosophies and differing political views in this debate are so multi-faceted and multi-layered that I also believe that the topic plays itself out on three distinct levels, namelythe procedural,the practicalandthe philosophical. These levels are the primary focus of this paper. Each relate to substantive questions on day-to-day politics in institutions, the effect and impact (or the usefulness) of art and intrinsic beliefs on the pre-eminence of human rights (particularly freedom of expression). This is linked to the unique role of a University and aFaculty of Lawto create the space for this discussion and to stimulate the ‘legal imagination’ to apply the ideas and principles uncovered in this exchange to the work of lawyers and legal academics. Against this background: In section 2, I offer some reflections on art and its potential to induce multiple interpretations with emphasis on examining the different reactions to art andhorror artin particular. In section 3, I put forward a different perspective on the question of freedom of expression as regards the events in the faculty as well as in general society. In section 4, I craft my own conception of the university as ‘open space’ and explore the role of students in that vibrant space. After engaging critically with the issues at the crux of the three levels — the procedural, the practical and the philosophicalin which this debate plays itself out, only one thing will — remain clear: The need to widen the vibrant space for dialogue, debate and 8 disagreement, for ‘re-imaginings, re-figurings and re-orientations’, remains an ideal that the Faculty must pursue indefatigably in all its endeavours.

2

The politics of horror art

‘I think you can leave the arts, superior or inferior, to the conscience of mankind’ W.B Yeats.

If we accept that ‘[f]or art to matter as a meaningful social construct it needs to be concretised on some level, while simultaneously embodying universal

6 7

8

Heyns (n 3 above) 9. Van Marle (n 3 above) 19. See D Kennedy ‘Form and substance in private law adjudication’ (1976) 89Harvard Law Review1685-1778. K van Marle ‘Jurisprudence, friendship and the university as heterogenous public space’ (2010) 127SALJ628-645.

8

9 significance’, then we can extract a nexus between law and art first as reflections of the ‘peaks and valleys’ of society and its progress (or lack/ slowness thereof) and second as constructs of social imagination and history. From a legal perspective, the artworks provide direct social commentary on the law. The etchings vividly reveal the mortality of law, its powerlessness and the fact that it requires the integrity, vigour and innovation of the human mind and spirit to work faster and better in order to create asafer, more just, egalitarian and perfect society (or am I just dreaming?).

Art has always had a purpose. Artists usually have a particular message they wish to convey. The effect is sometimes cathartic, but the reactions are always varied and conflicting. Perhaps what should be of concern in this particular discussion iswhy andhow we categorise art to explain the reactions that led to the various displacements of the artworks all over the Faculty building.

2.1

Why do we categorise art?

What was it about those pictures that created the furore which spawned the exchange between Heyns and Van Marle? Is it the depiction of a penis protruding a baby’s body? Is it the very explicit manner in which the etchings were crafted — rough charcoal, scratching on the human soul, their maniacal detail? After undertaking to write this piece, I showed these pictures to some friends (mainly students in the Humanities) and fellow Law students in search of an answer. The initial response was the same. First they looked at the artworks with grim shock and terror and seconds later they began theorising the relevance and substance of these pictures and the underlying questions of freedom of expression and the need to impress a harsh reality upon society as a call to action. Their views on these questions were vastly varied. Some angrily expressed scorn — ‘sis’, ‘yuck’, ‘that’s sick’ — for the artist and the image they were confronted with and did not even enter into the debate. Others felt the pictures could really make a strong statement to society about the horrors to which students of our ilk — urbanised, sophisticated, party-crazed, alcohol-driven and shallow — have become oblivious. As an aside, the fact that there were hostile reactions to the etchings does not mean that there are people who are ignorant of the realities that are portrayed in Diane Victor’s etchings. It might be more a matter of, to borrow a popular phrase, ‘the truth hurts’.

9

A du Preez ‘(Im)materiality: on the matter of art’ (2008) 14Image & Text30.

2.2

How do we categorise art?

 9

The differences in their reactions lie in my view – to follow aconstructivist political theory — in our mental images which are made up of our preconceptions and perceptions, our comfort zones, our conformity to the norms of ‘what is decent’ and ‘what is appropriate’ and our desire (or lack thereof) to break the mould. Charles Kegley adds flesh to this argument when he says: ‘Another part of the challenge stems from the tendency of people to resist unfamiliar information and ideas that undermine their habitual ways 10 of viewing and thinking’. He continues that: Our images ... simplify reality by exaggerating some features of the real world while ignoring others. Thus, we live in a world defined by our images ... Most of us look for information that reinforces our pre- existing beliefs about the world, assimilate new data into familiar images, mistakenly equate what we believe with what we know, and deny information that contradicts our expectations. We also rely on our intuitions without thinking and emotionally make snap 11 judgements. Finally he locates the source of these innate ways of thinking which inhibit such artworks as those of Diane Victor in her ‘Disasters of Peace’ series from occupying an open and uncontested space as follows: [H]ow we were socialised as children, traumatic events we may have experienced growing up that shape our personalities and psychological needs, exposure to the ideas of people whose expertise we respect, and the opinions about world affairs expressed by our frequent associates such as close friends or co-workers. Once we 12 acquire an image, it seems self evident. Consequently the following deserve comment: (i) There appear to be some social taboos which are difficult to overcome. The explicit sexually violent drawing, its grotesque nature and the forcefulness of the message can be disturbing indeed — but alsotouching. Following Kegley, it is clear that the many calls made by visitors and staff in favour of the removal of the artworks from the Centre are more a reflection of their inability to overcome those taboos than of the etchings.

10 11 12

C KegleyWorld Politics: trends and transformations(12ed 2009) 3-5. As above. As above.

10

(ii) At the same time the line that separates vivid imagery through visual expression and pure obscenity and vulgarity is very thin. Artists who wish to depict their art in a socially relevant way must be mindful of this. The penis in the skeletal figure in‘made to measure’and the sexual act in‘in sheep’s clothing’ treads closely over that line but the overriding message and the context of the art in my view tips the scale in its favour.

So, instead of fabricating arguments against the artworks, namely that 13 they are ‘harmful to children’ or ‘offensive to viewers’, a tolerant, open- minded and critical approach to art needs to be cultivated in line with a more antagonistic model of democracy that is open to plurality and radical politics. As Mouffe and Laclau put it ‘there is no possibility of society without antagonism, indeed without the forces that articulate a vision of society, it 14 could not exist’. To illustrate two equally powerful but completely opposite effects that horror art can have on viewers, I will rely on Susan Sontag and two striking Diane Victor artworks:

1. Theintended effectof galvanising us to aspire to a better and more just world and sending strong statements about the ‘realness’injustice, of immorality (wickedness to be more precise) and tragedy. This effect has the result of challenging people and igniting mindset shifts among the previously 15 ignorant. For this Sontag says (as Heyns quotes her): Still, I would like to suggest that it is a good in itself to acknowledge, to have enlarged, one’s sense of how much suffering there is in the world we share with others. And that someone who is perennially surprised that depravity exists, who continues to experience disillusionment (even incredulity) when confronted with evidence of what humans are capable of inflecting in the way of gruesome, hands- on cruelties upon other humans, has not reached moral or psychological adulthood. No one after a certain age has the right to

13

14

15

On ‘harm’, see JS MillOn Liberty (1859). This particular argument is quite puzzling. The view that the artworks areharmful to childrenis premised on the fact that the Department of Public Law is on the same floor as the Centre for Child Law. The pictures are displayed inside the Department so how could children going to the Centre for Child Law possibly see the etchings? C Mouffe & E LaclauHegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics(1985) 108. See generally C MouffeArtistic activism and agonistic spaces(2007). S Sontag ‘War and photography’ in N Owen (ed)Human rights, human wrongs (2003) 253 263 cited in Heyns (n 3 above) 11-12.