Detlef Jumpertz

Readers will recall that my last entry contained a slice of a satirical portrait that I had just completed. It looks good in its sparse and understated framing, leaving the drawing to speak for itself, but it was always intended to be part of series (at least 3 such portraits).

And as part of that I have begun work on #2 - here's a sneak peek (and it's not me!!!!).

In the meantime #1 is off to competition on Feb 9 (we'll see whether there's any success on the selection front). I'm so glad that I've proceeded down the path of this series - before such activity becomes a criminal offence and/or is censored out of existence.

I say that (partially) in jest, but as recent events have indicated there are some really worrying and disturbing trends.

#1 Taking pics given the flick

A photographer of industrial landscapes was asked by police to persist taking photos of industrial complexes in Geelong, Victoria. The police effectively telling the photographer to move along because of security concerns - this is despite the photographer being completely within his rights and conversely the police having no legal right to give such marching orders.

and.....

#2 Flag day for some

Footscray police have seized Melbourne artist Azlan McLennan's artwork, ìProudly unAustralianî from a billboard belonging to the Trocadero Art Space gallery. Police claimed that they received "numerous complaints from the community." The nature of these complaints has not yet been revealed.

Tamara Winikoff, Executive Director of National Association for the Visual Arts [NAVA] said ìThe grounds for censorship of artists in Australia has become a really hot issue, in light of the new sedition clause in the Anti-Terrorism legislation rushed through parliament just before Xmas.î

Winikoff continued, ìIn this case we are asking urgent questions about the artistís rights: - did the police have a warrant to remove the artwork, and if so on what grounds; - is burning or defacing an Australian flag illegal under state or federal laws; - are artists protected from these laws by satirical or fair comment provisions; - would such an act be considered seditious under the new legislation; - what must be the nature and form of public complaints in order to justify such actions?î

ìIt is high time that the grounds for censorship of an art work and the process of assessing its validity was revised to reflect the values of a liberal democratic society like Australiaî asserts Winikoff.

The federal Attorney General has promised a review of the Sedition Clause this year. Along with others in the arts and media sectors, Winikoff has asserted that the new sedition legislation is draconian and jeopardises artistsí freedom to make legitimate comment on governmentsí actions and call into question things with which they disagree.

ìThis legislation must be changed before a gross miscarriage of justice occursî said Winikoff.

UPDATE [30 JAN]: It just gets curiouser and curiouser.

<<Older    Main    Newer>>

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?