Ethical debate: Censorship
Last year there was outrage when several European newspapers printed cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammed. Would it be appropriate to display these images in a museum?
It would be appropriate to display these images, but not on their own.
They would need to be in context with other imagery along similar lines. After all, how would the Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Jewish communities react if imagery, writing, or statements about their religions were displayed, evaluated and explained at the same time?
At the last Museums Association conference we were challenged to be occasionally controversial and while displaying these images would incite a negative reaction, we are forgetting the cultural strength that museums as a whole command. Publishing the cartoons in a newspaper promotes sensationalism, but displaying them in a museum should promote debate.
It is part of our remit to try and encourage understanding, while
accommodating and celebrating the diversity of society. I would embrace the chance to hear and understand why Muslim cultures are so outraged by the cartoons. Why did they evoke such a strong reaction? I want a rational explanation that will increase my understanding and respect of their beliefs.
Ultimately, museums could provide the neutral ground that is required to promote dialogue and cultural understanding for all people.
David Stevens, documentation and registration officer, Hereford Museum and Art Gallery
In the current political climate it would not be appropriate for a museum to display the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad printed in newspapers, but that is not to say that a museum should never display them.
But should a museum acquire the cartoons in the first place? This obviously depends on who and what the museum represents and how they intend to use them. For instance, a museum of cartoon history, or even a museum associated with newspapers would be relevant collections for these images to be housed in because they are important to the history of cartoons and the appropriate newspaper.
If the images were housed in a public museum, the way they are used
could be monitored and restricted.
For example, at the moment, I think it would be acceptable for people to see the images for research purposes as long as they were strictly monitored to ensure that the images are not inappropriately used again. The circumstances surrounding the history of the images would need to be well documented so that curators would be aware of the controversy that may arise if they were to be displayed.
Again how they are interpreted and the context of the display would be important. Perhaps having a display curated by museum staff and members of the Muslim community with their responses to the images alongside comments from members of other faith groups would be the best way to go about it.
Name withheld
I would like to answer this by asking further questions. Racism and religious hatred exist, it is not nice and should not be glorified, but does that mean that we should not cover it? Museums often avoid difficult issues. If we don't reflect the world are we showing a bias or prejudiced view?
If we can give a balanced view is this enough or should we as a profession stand up for what we believe is right or wrong? Can museums make an ethical stand for what is morally right? May be not showing something is the ethical stand that we can take?
The display or use of any contentious objects or images is complex and often difficult. This does not mean that we should not do it, but if we do we need to know why we are doing it and what the outcome or backlash will be. My advice would be to consult with the religious and community leaders involved in the issue. I think that this is the case whatever the issue and whoever is involved. It is also worth taking legal advice to ensure that the display of racially sensitive material is within the law.
Jonathan Wallis, Assistant Head of Museums, Derby Museums & Art Gallery
I am a keen proponent of freedom of expression. However, I feel that British museums exist in the context of a 'live and let live' society, and consequently that caution should be exercised where there is a potential to express ideas that impinge upon other people's freedoms.
It is good museum practice to engage visitors in modern debates and raise all viewpoints. Nonetheless, there is a possibility that the public might view an exhibition of the Muhammed idol cartoons as a cynical ploy to attract media attention and crowds through sensation rather than through the coherent, impartial presentation of contemporary polemic issues.
Recent accusations of racism in the 'Big Brother' house and Channel 4's retort that it was opening a dialogue into the issue is an analogous situation, from Channel 4 received relatively negative feedback.
A critical consideration is that the Muhammed cartoons have proved inflammatory to the point of inciting dozens of Christian then Muslim murders during riot violence in Nigeria. Without diminishing the importance of freedom of expression, this fact makes their display in any public arena a matter for extremely serious deliberation. British museums should be encouraged to reflect a society where diverse views flourish and censorship is resisted, but our most vital social freedom is that to life.
Dr Jenny Cripps, Curator of Collections, Dorset County Museum
In order to answer this question, it is first necessary to ascertain whether a museum is the place for these images: do they have cultural and historical significance; as artifacts, do they have the potential to enlighten the visitor about an aspect of their time and context?
Undeniably, the answer is yes. So what might prompt us to regard it as inappropriate to display the cartoons in a museum? This is an area where free speech and religious sensibilities are in conflict. But is it the role of a museum to take sides in a conflict, or simply to document its existence as part of historical fact?
Islam, we have long been led to understand, is no laughing matter: just ask Salman Rushdie. But it is not for us to pick and choose from the artifacts of history and the present for fear of upsetting the sensibilities of any particular group of people: would we feel it appropriate to suppress the sort of cartoons that have been appearing in Private Eye since its inception, on the grounds that they are irreverent or subversive? And what effect would it have if we did?
The job of displaying and interpreting collections for public consumption is a far cry from perpetuating blasphemy or inciting racial hatred. To refuse to display the cartoons on the basis of some misguidedly 'politically correct' impulse would be to stand on fairly shaky ethical ground, quite apart from the fact that suppression and censorship, as well as being in opposition to several fundamental freedoms, often has the effect of fostering prurient curiosity.
I would maintain that there can be no question about whether it would be 'appropriate' to display the images in question in a museum: the only real question is whether it would be safe.
Lalla Merlin, Education and Outreach Officer, South Molton Museum
It would be appropriate to display these images, but not on their own.
They would need to be in context with other imagery along similar lines. After all, how would the Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Jewish communities react if imagery, writing, or statements about their religions were displayed, evaluated and explained at the same time?
At the last Museums Association conference we were challenged to be occasionally controversial and while displaying these images would incite a negative reaction, we are forgetting the cultural strength that museums as a whole command. Publishing the cartoons in a newspaper promotes sensationalism, but displaying them in a museum should promote debate.
It is part of our remit to try and encourage understanding, while
accommodating and celebrating the diversity of society. I would embrace the chance to hear and understand why Muslim cultures are so outraged by the cartoons. Why did they evoke such a strong reaction? I want a rational explanation that will increase my understanding and respect of their beliefs.
Ultimately, museums could provide the neutral ground that is required to promote dialogue and cultural understanding for all people.
David Stevens, documentation and registration officer, Hereford Museum and Art Gallery
In the current political climate it would not be appropriate for a museum to display the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad printed in newspapers, but that is not to say that a museum should never display them.
But should a museum acquire the cartoons in the first place? This obviously depends on who and what the museum represents and how they intend to use them. For instance, a museum of cartoon history, or even a museum associated with newspapers would be relevant collections for these images to be housed in because they are important to the history of cartoons and the appropriate newspaper.
If the images were housed in a public museum, the way they are used
could be monitored and restricted.
For example, at the moment, I think it would be acceptable for people to see the images for research purposes as long as they were strictly monitored to ensure that the images are not inappropriately used again. The circumstances surrounding the history of the images would need to be well documented so that curators would be aware of the controversy that may arise if they were to be displayed.
Again how they are interpreted and the context of the display would be important. Perhaps having a display curated by museum staff and members of the Muslim community with their responses to the images alongside comments from members of other faith groups would be the best way to go about it.
Name withheld
I would like to answer this by asking further questions. Racism and religious hatred exist, it is not nice and should not be glorified, but does that mean that we should not cover it? Museums often avoid difficult issues. If we don't reflect the world are we showing a bias or prejudiced view?
If we can give a balanced view is this enough or should we as a profession stand up for what we believe is right or wrong? Can museums make an ethical stand for what is morally right? May be not showing something is the ethical stand that we can take?
The display or use of any contentious objects or images is complex and often difficult. This does not mean that we should not do it, but if we do we need to know why we are doing it and what the outcome or backlash will be. My advice would be to consult with the religious and community leaders involved in the issue. I think that this is the case whatever the issue and whoever is involved. It is also worth taking legal advice to ensure that the display of racially sensitive material is within the law.
Jonathan Wallis, Assistant Head of Museums, Derby Museums & Art Gallery
I am a keen proponent of freedom of expression. However, I feel that British museums exist in the context of a 'live and let live' society, and consequently that caution should be exercised where there is a potential to express ideas that impinge upon other people's freedoms.
It is good museum practice to engage visitors in modern debates and raise all viewpoints. Nonetheless, there is a possibility that the public might view an exhibition of the Muhammed idol cartoons as a cynical ploy to attract media attention and crowds through sensation rather than through the coherent, impartial presentation of contemporary polemic issues.
Recent accusations of racism in the 'Big Brother' house and Channel 4's retort that it was opening a dialogue into the issue is an analogous situation, from Channel 4 received relatively negative feedback.
A critical consideration is that the Muhammed cartoons have proved inflammatory to the point of inciting dozens of Christian then Muslim murders during riot violence in Nigeria. Without diminishing the importance of freedom of expression, this fact makes their display in any public arena a matter for extremely serious deliberation. British museums should be encouraged to reflect a society where diverse views flourish and censorship is resisted, but our most vital social freedom is that to life.
Dr Jenny Cripps, Curator of Collections, Dorset County Museum
In order to answer this question, it is first necessary to ascertain whether a museum is the place for these images: do they have cultural and historical significance; as artifacts, do they have the potential to enlighten the visitor about an aspect of their time and context?
Undeniably, the answer is yes. So what might prompt us to regard it as inappropriate to display the cartoons in a museum? This is an area where free speech and religious sensibilities are in conflict. But is it the role of a museum to take sides in a conflict, or simply to document its existence as part of historical fact?
Islam, we have long been led to understand, is no laughing matter: just ask Salman Rushdie. But it is not for us to pick and choose from the artifacts of history and the present for fear of upsetting the sensibilities of any particular group of people: would we feel it appropriate to suppress the sort of cartoons that have been appearing in Private Eye since its inception, on the grounds that they are irreverent or subversive? And what effect would it have if we did?
The job of displaying and interpreting collections for public consumption is a far cry from perpetuating blasphemy or inciting racial hatred. To refuse to display the cartoons on the basis of some misguidedly 'politically correct' impulse would be to stand on fairly shaky ethical ground, quite apart from the fact that suppression and censorship, as well as being in opposition to several fundamental freedoms, often has the effect of fostering prurient curiosity.
I would maintain that there can be no question about whether it would be 'appropriate' to display the images in question in a museum: the only real question is whether it would be safe.
Lalla Merlin, Education and Outreach Officer, South Molton Museum
