Ev Censorship.docx

ETHICS AND VALUES (SP341) ASSIGNMENT-1 TOPIC- CENSORSHIP OF ART

PREPARED BY1-PARTH MODI (16BEC092) 2-ABRAR MANSURI(16BEC093) 3-MUSKAN PORWAL(16BEC094) 4-NAMAN GOYAL(16BEC095) 5-NITESH KALWANI(16BEC096) 6-ONIMA PANDIT(16BEC097) 7-OSHIN BANSAL(16BEC098)

CENSORSHIP OF ART INTRODUCTIONMerriam-Webster defines censorship as "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and removing things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc." The art world -- a realm populated by masterpieces often hailed for their transgressive, controversial and taboo characteristics -regularly butts against standards of decency and good taste in the fight for freedom of expression. Throughout history works of art have been altered, silenced and even erased due to unacceptable content, whether the motivations for censorship were religious, social or political. Yet artists have long pushed boundaries of "offensive" through their imagery and content, presenting everything from portraits of a vulva to a performance replicating 19th century "human zoos."

Censorship can also be a finely tuned system of protecting our children. Just as we recognise that certain content should not be accessed by society at all, we can also recognise that certain content (e.g. sexual content) is unsuitable for children, and we can pass censorship accordingly. For example, certain forms of erotic artwork might be unsuitable for children, despite their artistic merits.

Today's calls for censorship are not motivated solely by morality and taste, but also by the widespread belief that exposure to images of violence causes people to act in destructive ways. Pro-censorship forces, including many politicians, often cite a multitude of "scientific studies" that allegedly prove fictional violence leads to real-life violence. There is, in fact, virtually no evidence that fictional violence causes otherwise stable people to become violent. And if we suppressed material based on the actions of unstable people, no work of fiction or art would be safe from censorship. Serial killer Theodore Bundy collected cheerleading magazines. And the work most often cited by psychopaths as justification for their acts of violence is the Bible. But what about the rest of us? Does exposure to media violence actually lead to criminal or anti-social conduct by otherwise stable people, including children, who spend an average of 28 hours watching television each week? These are important questions. If there really were a clear cause-and-effect relationship between what normal children see on TV and harmful actions, then limits on such expression might arguably be warranted.

Is Censorship of Art Necessary? The limit to which a society should place restrictions on artist’s ability to express often results in a debate. The restrictions polarize opinion. The recent controversy of cuss words and AIB Knockout in India or decision of UK universities to pose ban on pop song Blurred lines has brought the matter into focus. All these decisions points out the disadvantages of open expression. So, let us have a debate to date on the subject of censorship of art. Is Censorship of art necessary?

Yes -Censorship has always remained an integral part of artistic world. Whether in modern U.S. or in ancient Rome, it has existed in every society and in every period. -If art challenges the strong beliefs of any society, whether its religious, political or ideological, results in offense, and therefore censorship becomes necessary. -There is a difference between offensiveness and artistic merit. Whenever, artistic merit turns into offensiveness censorship is required. -The censorship of art is must to stop unrest and violence linked to religious and political concerns from spreading in a country. -Free expression that is objectionable and appals shocks or disgusts cannot be approved. There is difference between revolutionary art and abhorrent art. Revolutionary form of art brings constructive changes, however offensiveness always humiliate a section of society.

No -Offensiveness and artistic merit are nebulous terms that lack objectivity. The tastes and acceptable norms in a society keep changing and with it the two terms get their meaning. -There is no need to find moral guidance in entertainment shows, songs or books. It is meant for just pleasure. -There is no such thing as an ‘immoral book’ or ‘moral book’. A book is either badly written or well written. It is the same concept with all forms of art. -Original form of art can never be created on the safe middle ground. It will always be at the edge, as originality challenges

and questions orthodox moral codes and concepts. -Art is the mirror image of the culture, the period in which it is produced. It reflects all the positive aspects as well the uncomfortable, dark stuff prevailing in society.

— Why

censorship is necessary?

Freedom and Censorship — Whenever the word “CENSORSHIP” is used it is always misinterpreted that the artist is not allowed to express his mind. In short whenever censorship is used the opposition will claim that the freedom to express thoughts is denied. — Most of the countries in the world are free countries allowing its citizens all types of freedom especially freedom of speech or rather freedom of expressing thoughts in any suitable way.

Are we really free? — The answer is a big “NO”. — India is a secular country, but its citizens are not secular at all. — India is divided mainly in three parts on religious basis.

— Thus mainly in india there are two religions hinduism and islam. — To peacefully coexist we must respect every religion’s beliefs. — We must never hurt the sentiments of any religion. — Most of the Indian citizens believe in their religion firmly, and will take up arms if they feel that their religion is insulted.

— And herein comes the concept of censorship . — There are fanatics in both the religions. — These people are opportunists which crave the opportunity to divide india for mostly political reasons. — These people often use movies or any other form of art and misinterpret it and then to enrage the people. — India has witnessed many communal riots. In ahmedabad itself was the worst 2002 riot in which thousands of people were killed. Charlie hebdo shooting — Charlie Hebdo shooting are the best example why censorship is very necessary for the peaceful and cordial survival of human beings.

Cause: — Charlie Hebdo is a French weekly magazine, featuring cartoons, reports, polemics, and jokes. — Irreverent and stridently non-conformist in tone, the publication describes itself as above all secular, skeptic, and atheist, far-leftwing, and anti-racistpublishing articles about the extreme right (especiallyreligion (Catholicism, Islam, Judaism), politics and culture. — The magazine has been the target of two terrorist attacks, in 2011 and 2015. Both were presumed to be in response to a number of controversial Muhammad cartoons it published. In the second ofthese attacks, 12 people were killed, including publishing director Charb and several other prominent cartoonists.

Statistics — On 7 January 2015 at about 11:30 local time, two brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, forced their way into the offices of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris. — Armed with rifles and other weapons, they killed 12 people and injured 11 others. — The gunmen identified themselves as belonging to the Islamist terrorist group Al-Qaeda's branch in Yemen, which took responsibility for the attack. — Several related attacks followed in the Île-de-France region.

MF hussain — His paintings allegedly hurt the religious sentiments of Hindu nationalist groups, which beginning in the 1990s mounted a campaign of protest against him. — There were several protests against him and many complaints were filed in the courts.

—

—

— Conclusion — Censorship is very important. — For those who say that censorship denies the right to freedom, I say that if innocent lives are saved then a few restrictions on freedom seems reasonable. — Freedom to express thoughts must be used judiciously. — It is never easy for two religion to coexist peacefully because there will be a constant clash of their ideologies and beliefs. — India has been, is and always will be a tinderbox. — Every now and then someone tries to spark fire in india. They do it either by hate speeches, arts or movies and press.

— To stop these people censorship is must.

WHY SHOULD CENSORSHIP BE REDUCED WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE REASONS THAT SUPPORT AND PROMOTE CENSORSHIP BUT MANY NAY MOST PEOPLE WOULD THINK OTHERWISE AND STILL SUPPORT BAN OR EVEN REDUCTION OF CENSORSHIP ON A WORK OF ART. THE FOLLOWING REASONS ARE ALWAYS GIVEN BY THOSE WHO ARE AGAINST CENSORSHIP:

An individual’s right • An artist has the right to express, and until his expressions impinge the rights or safety of others his work should not be altered in a way that all his thoughts lose meaning. • This may be controversial as some people might not like what an artist has to say but maybe others might. So its up to the people also to choose what they want to see and if someone has some objection with any of the content he/she should avoid seeing it but not force others not to enjoy the beautiful piece of art if it is.

Adult contents • With a system of age rating to art forms there is no need of censorship of explicit content. • This may also be controversial as sometimes the nudity or the harsh words(in a movie) are important for the plot but sometimes they are there for just entertainment. Also in recent times it is seen that movies and music with maximum adult content are favoured more by the people for whatever reason that may be. • In such situation the age rating system should be strictly followed and allowing children in the showcasing of adult rated arts should be strictly prohibited.

Modern art • Some say that modern arts push the boundary of what content is acceptable to this we can say that, that has been going on

forever what we consider acceptable today was modern 50 years ago and was unacceptable then but we opened our minds and we should keep doing it once in a while.

Watching may lead to doing. • Some researches say that watching many violent scenes or sex scenes may lead to more number of murders and rapes. But thinking about it we can say that a person with violent mind set is going to do what he wants to anyway. Watching these kinds of content may give him new ideas to do it, but first of all the number of such individuals is way less in comparison to others therefore for a few people with such tendencies why should a huge population be curbed of watching such content. There are many other ways to decrease the crime rate then to censor the art.

Criteria set by the government of what is acceptable • Government decides what is acceptable for the society to watch. • For example, if a movie is cut by the cbfc and as an experiment both the original version and the cut version are shown at the cinema halls what would be the results be.

Motivating piracy •

If music or movies are censored while certification then many viewers better like to watch the uncut versions of the movie by downloading it from the torrents then going to the showcasing of such art forms. This impacts the earning of the artists and producer enormously.

Absurd censorship • Censoring biographies, and real life events or documentaries is just absurd • For example the famous ‘udta Punjab’ incident, a documentary called final solution looking at the riots of Gujarat in 2002 was banned by the cbfc in 2004, although the ban was lifted after a sustained campaign. • Also ‘lipstick under my burkha’ was denied certification initially saying that the story was “lady oriented, their fantasy above life”. • Also sometimes words having more than one expression are cut even if it is used in non controversial context. For example

In a movie if dog and b**** both are used then b**** is censored while dog is used freely. And amusingly in the hindi dubbed version the translation of both the words are used.

Media censorship •

Live media do not get their content cut but they do have to alter it if forced to. sometimes news channels have to change the news of what is happening somewhere and make it less violent or less cruel to show it to the people at other places but this is also beneficial only to a certain extent.

Conclusion In conclusion we may agree that completely banning censorship of art will also not be feasible to the society but its reduction is very necessary because while censorship for the viewers might be just another artwork being altered, but for the artist it is more like torture. Censoring someone’s thoughts about the society is injustice to that person.