ETHICS IN ART

 Ethics in art is a theme that, in addition to being discussed in class, left me to think about the influence it can have on our conduct as artists. Ethical reflection is essential, not only as people but as professionals. We can approach this topic in theoretical terms and analyze some works that were in some way or are controversial. 

When I learned what Ethics was in the discipline of Philosophy, I understood that ethics is the reflection on moral principles, rules of behavior (which are born of religion, culture, history, politics, among other factors) that are accepted by society. Ethics is related to our moral principles, to our values. 

Art is related to the creative process of work, in whatever area, and as such, it should be a free and unimpeded process. The big problem is when art and ethics clash. When art shows us works that criticize, challenge, or even offend (although this is also debatable) people's moral values, be they religious, cultural, social, among others. 

According to Blood (2001), this ethical and moral confrontation only happens when art provokes ethics, morals. They are works that appear that somehow intend to generate controversy on purpose. And here we think about an important question and that your answer could depend on freedom of creation in art: are their limitations to artistic freedom. 

The problem here is that both art and moral values ​​are subjective, and the issues that arise from this relationship can be interpreted in different ways. We often do not understand art, because we do not understand its historical context. we have to think, as Blood (2001) tells us, that historical, political, and social contexts change, and with them our perception of certain works changes. How would a work by Picasso or Miró be understood in medieval times? 

I will address some examples that led me to consider that art should have limits as opposed to some examples of works that do not shock me personally but have been criticized.

Marcel Duchamp, Fountain, 1917

When the work "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp appeared in 1917, it was widely criticized and rejected by the public and today it is an icon of 20th-century art.

Although the work does not tell me anything, I think it was with the intention of provoking that Marcel Duchamp did it. He was not the creator of an artistic object, in my view, but the creator of an idea. There could be people who, in 1917, were offended or shocked by this work, but today the only thing that people could discuss was the value of the object as a work of art. Not the confrontation between ethics and art.

Chris Ofili, The Holy Virgin Mary, 1996, paper collage, oil paint, glitter, polyester resin, map pins & elephant dung on linen, 243.8 x 182.9 cm

In 1996, the work "The Holy Virgin Mary by Chris Ofili" shocked people. «The image caused considerable outrage from some members of the public across the country, including then-mayor of New York City Rudolph Giuliani. With its collaged images of women’s buttocks, glitter-mixed paint, and applied balls of elephant dung, many considered the painting blasphemous. Ofili stated that it was not his intention; he wanted to acknowledge both the sacred and secular, even sensual, the beauty of the Virgin Mary, and that the dung, in his parents' native country of Nigeria, symbolized fertility and the power of the elephant. » (Blood, 2001, p. 281) In this case, and bearing in mind that Christianity is a living doctrine, art was an offense to the moral and religious values ​​of Christians. If Ofili had used the same techniques and materials, but with a different image, it would not have been so controversial. I was uncomfortable with this work and considered it excessive. Although the artist claimed that he had no intention of offending, the truth is that he knew that religion is a sensitive subject and that they would not remain indifferent to his work. But if we think that Christianity could one day be considered mythology and not a religion, as it happened in the ancient Greek or Roman religion, which today is mythology, then we would not have this work as offensive. We would have this work as original work or not, as an icon of art or not, as provocative or not. Outside his time, work takes on another meaning. But to think about art outside its time and outside the values ​​that condemn it at the moment it is being lived is very difficult. Even today, this work would be reprehensible. And we can go to extremes when we provoke too much, as is the following example.

One of the controversial cartoons is responsible for the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

Charlie Hebdo is a French satirical weekly magazine. On January 7, 2015, the magazine's office was invaded by two men who killed 12 people. 

If we look at the work, it is excessive, especially in the view of who is targeted. In this case, the Muslim people and their faith in Muhammad and the Koran. The purpose of these cartoons is precisely to be critical and to provoke.

Here we return to the confrontation between art and ethics. Did they go too far? Are there limits to the creation of an artist? 

According to Ribeiro (2020), the attack on Charlie Hebdo was more than an attack, it was a trial. The attack shows us that there are limits, that people feel attacked and offended, that they are not indifferent to a work of art. 

Are there limits? In my opinion, yes. Although I realized that in another historical context, these caricatures will not have the weight that they had and still have today, I think they are excessive. There are limits to artistic creation while leaving room for criticism. These cartoons are not just a criticism, they are offensive to the Muslim people. This is an example where the provocation of art can lead to a confrontation between ethics and art to the extreme.

References:

Blood, P. et al. (2001) Introduction to Art: Design, Context, and Meaning. The University of North Georgia. [online] Available from: Introduction to Art-082817.pdf (ung.edu) [Accessed: 20/01/30]
Holodny, E. (2015) Charlie Hebdo Editor-In-Chief: Every Time We Draw A Cartoon Of Muhammad, We Defend Freedom Of Religion. Business Insider, 18/01. [online image] Available from: Charlie Hebdo: Cartoon Of Muhammad Is Defense Of Freedom Of Religion - Business Insider [Accessed: 20/01/30]
Khan Academy (s.d.) Chris Ofili, The Holy Virgin Mary. [online image] Available from: Chris Ofili, The Holy Virgin Mary (article) | Khan Academy [Accessed: 20/01/30]
Ribeiro, J. (2020) Charlie Hebdo, mais do que um ataque em julgamento. Público, 01/09. [online] Available from: “Charlie Hebdo”, mais do que um ataque em julgamento | Europa | PÚBLICO (publico.pt) [Accessed: 20/01/30]
Tate (s.d.) Marcel Duchamp. [online image] Available from: Marcel Duchamp 1887–1968 | Tate [Accessed 20/01/30]