Nude Mika
Mike in Cairns
Warning: modern art may offend some viewers. A full-frontal nude photograph
of Maori entertainer Mika wearing false breasts is causing controversy at
the new Christchurch Art Gallery.
It's been labelled disgusting and pornographic, and one woman has called for
its removal - but the artist is thrilled with the reaction, and the gallery
remains unrepentant.
Mika says he loves the photograph, taken in 1994.
"I've always liked the masculine and the feminine. I can drop kick a rugby
ball and put eyeliner on straight."
But Christchurch woman Diane Botherway, 50, says it took days to get the
image out of her mind.
"I walked round the corner, and I felt like there was a nude man standing
there exposing himself to me. That's how much of a shock it was, because it
was so graphic.
"You just couldn't get away from it. I felt almost violated."
She says while she expects to see nude paintings in an art gallery, they're
easily avoided.
"But this thing. You could not avoid it. You walked round the corner and
wham.
"If it had been a painting, it would have just taken the raw edge off it. I
just felt that they'd taken a liberty with me, probably because I'd gone to
be informed and educated . . . now I don't trust them any more."
Fellow Christchurch woman Jo Cotton, 36, has written to the gallery
requesting the photograph's removal. She believes the 3m-high image "crosses
the line of good taste" and is unsuitable for children.
"An art gallery is a public place for the general public and I don't know if
they have a social conscience about what they put up."
Both woman are Christians, but insist they're not prudes.
Cotton visited the gallery with her two sons, aged seven and four, and says
the contemporary section (where the photograph is displayed) is interesting
for children.
"It's kind of an area where you want to take your children, but you
wouldn't. Honestly, it should have been in one of those pornographic
magazines."
Hubert Klaassens, gallery public programmes manager, confirmed four letters
of complaint had been received since the work, Mika: Kai Tahu, went up on
May 10.
"It's not a very high percentage, but we take all our feedback seriously,
good and bad."
He says three signs notify viewers that some works can offend and teachers
are advised of the Mika photograph, so they can choose whether classes visit
that section of the gallery.
There are no plans to remove the work, which is part of the gallery's
permanent collection. It will hang for at least another six months.
"We're not blind to those letters of course. We acknowledge that people have
a right to express their beliefs and feelings and concerns," Klaassens says.
"We will never deliberately go out of our way to upset anyone."
However, he says the male nude is a "well explored subject" in international
art.
"You go and look at the statue of David and there it is. Do you want that in
a separate room? To some people that may be just as difficult to process as
Mika, and yet David is a shining example of an incredible work of art."
Klaassens says the artist, Christine Webster, has an international
reputation.
"She is an extremely well-established and highly-respected artist. That
doesn't mean to say that everybody has to like her, that's a different
issue, but the gallery will collect works of merit and this particular work
would have been selected on the very same reasons as we select other works."
Mika: Kai Tahu comes from an exhibition called Black Carnival, which
features 60 images. The gallery received the piece in 1995, as part of a
$5000 fee paid for the short-term showing of the entire series in the former
McDougall Contemporary Art Annex. Staff recall at least one letter of
complaint to the local newspaper, but say generally, the exhibition was well
received.
Artist Christine Webster told the Sunday Star-Times the series was about
questioning authority and reordering hierarchy.
"It's kind of a subversion, the whole idea of carnival, where people could
sort of do anything."
She said it was "very affirming" to get strong feedback.
"I'm kind of thrilled, because the good thing about it is it creates
discussion and that creates a learning opportunity - for myself as well,
about the audience."
Mika said it was appropriate the gallery warned viewers of the nude content.
"I believe, as an artist, you should explore whatever you want, but I do
believe people should be allowed the boundaries to say `no, I don't want to
see that,' or `yes I do'.
"Freedom of artistic expression by all means, but also the right to freedom
of protection to those who don't want to be subjected to those things."
Meanwhile, the wider Christchurch arts fraternity is supporting the
gallery's decision to leave the photograph up.
"I don't think that public art galleries should bow to public criticism like
this," said Margaret Duncan, art critic and tutor.
"I think if it's in the art gallery collection it should be shown, and I
think that if people want to go to an art gallery then they should be open
to everything that those experts have chosen and deemed fit for public
consumption."
Private gallery owner Jonathan Smart said the work was a "valid exploration"
of ideas to do with masquerade, nudity and different aspects of personality
and self.
"I don't think it was a risky piece to put up. I would see it as mildly
confrontational and I would see one of the aspects of good art, of good
practice, is that it be mildly confrontational."
FROM Sunday Star Times www.sundaystartimes.co.nz
Discuss this on the forum - http://www.qrd.org.nz/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=12
August 17th 2003 By KIM KNIGHT