Brett Murray's Portrait: Because it's wrong!
Art is a beautiful thing. It has been used to communicate our feelings. To ask questions when no one dared to ask. It can be controversial, it can be entertaining, thought provoking, it has been used in joyous moments, it has been used to communicate our hardships, it's been used to comfort us during those hardships.
Art is a powerful and important aspect of society. So important that our constitution even endorses and attempts to protect the practice of art as a trade. Hence we have a "freedom of artistic creativity" forming part of the freedom of expression.
It is then up to us, the lovers of art, both consumers and artists to respect it. To tread carefully, and always consider the implications of our works. This brings me to Brett Murray's distasteful portrait of Pres. JG Zuma at Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg.
In an attempt to get my point across, I will refer to President Jacob G. Zuma as Jacob of Nkandla, without the President title. This, I hope, will help us to see that Brett Murray's portrait is plain wrong. The artwork is not wrong because its subject happens to be a Head of State, no, it's wrong because it's wrong. No right is absolute, because if that were the case, then the planet would be in chaos. Thus, even if the constitution endorses freedom to artistic creativity, artists still need to ensure that they do not trample on others' basic human rights while caught up in their own creative bubble. The 'artwork' in question, appears to be an attack on Jacob of Nkandla's private person. It is distasteful. It belittles him as a man, a husband, father and grandfather. When I saw the 'artwork', I could not attach any connotations to it, except for that it was disrespectful. It undermines him as a being. It is wrong.
Let's just for a second assume that Jacob Zuma is not a president. Let's assume he is someone you know. Your doctor, neighbour, friend, a homeless man at the park, or a convicted rapist. Would it have been well received? Would your neighbour's kids appreciate seeing their father like that? Would you want your friend to be depicted in such a manner? Would the rapist's family appreciate such art?
I doubt if the Human Rights Commission would allow a homeless person to be depicted in such a degrading manner. It is wrong.
I'm not sure what message he was trying to get across. I'm also unsure as to whether that message was received. What I do know however, is, that is not art. That was an attack on Jacob of Nkandla as a person. It is a violation of his personal space. What happened to respecting our elders? There is no excuse for that. That is not art, that is arrogance, ignorance, false knowledge and their cousins and siblings all wrapped up in a moron.
Having such a piece in public display is an insult to other artists. It is wrong. It should be removed from a place where people showcase their God given talent.
