Senate Bill No. 2464: A crime against Philippine culture
(Conclusion)
Last week, I wrote about the controversial Senate Bill No. 2464, the Anti-Obscenity and Pornography Act of 2008 introduced by Senator Manny Villar. The Senate should know that the bill’s approval means one of the worst crimes against Philippine culture. It is repressive to the arts with its aims to criminalize “obscene” and “pornographic” acts regardless of intention. No room for social commentary. No room for creative expression. Nothing.
With regard to objections to this bill on its repercussions to the art scene, two fundamental questions are raised: 1) Is art above the law? 2) Given that the law would allow some concessions for artists, couldn’t just anybody call himself or herself an “artist” to allow himself or herself to get away with truly punishable acts that masquerade as “art”?
On the first question, the answer is no. Art isn’t, or rather, shouldn’t be, above the law. But the law should recognize the intrinsic value of art and culture and therefore should be created with room for freedom of expression. Artists are always trying to move past boundaries but, as people who usually seem to be on the cusp of the exceptional and transitional points in history, this is not without value and not without reason. Except in the most extreme cases (exceedingly rare), artistic intent is valid grounds to create material with transgressive content. In Australia, pornography laws consider educational, literary and artistic merit as part of the circumstances in determining if material is indeed offensive.
There is no cause to fear that, without such a law, artists are going to run out of their homes in reckless abandon and perform wild sexual acts in the street in the name of art. Most of the time, any possibly offensive material is exhibited or performed within the realm of spaces, galleries or institutions, which are usually visited or witnessed by those who already recognize that there is something beyond such works’ face value. Also, artists and those working in the spaces with such material have little difficulty when it comes to finding a suitable arrangement in these matters. Museums abroad section off possibly offensive material with signage by the entryways alerting to the adult content of the work and that access is only for those 18 years of age and above. Such an approach could work in the Philippines provided that the material is truly of adult and potentially offensive content and not the absurd ideas the bill has of what is obscene or pornographic.
On the second question, a real criminal could try to call himself or herself an artist to, for example, get away with photos of child pornography which he or she would claim to be “art.” But that doesn’t mean that he or she is really an artist. An artist does not simply become an artist because he or she declares himself or herself to be one. The designation of “artist” is regulated by art institutions and art experts within and permeating those institutions. Becoming an artist does not take one act but unfolds over a series of acts that show the person’s intentionality to participate in such a discourse. It is doubtable that real criminals with malicious intent would go through the tedious process of putting together portfolios and exhibitions proposals; going around the different galleries, hoping to get picked up to produce a show; and, if accepted, preparing several weeks or even months for the exhibition; facilitating and even funding such things as invitation design, mail-outs, press releases, food and drinks; then after or even before the show ends, doing it all over again. This is not even to mention all the networking he or she would need to do along the way, like going to fellow artists’ exhibitions and talks, participating and even initiating group projects, dialoguing with curators, talking with potential collectors and applying for local and international residencies. Those who think being an artist is so easy (which is not to discourage anyone from undertaking creative endeavors) do real artists injustice. A look at the curriculum vitae of the supposed artist and consultations with museum and gallery directors and curators will belie any false claims.
Killing the Philippines’ Potential as a Cultural Power
The Philippines has the ability to position itself as a cultural tiger. The nation is not lacking in talented artists, rather the country’s cultural community is lacking in funding and support from the government and the wider public. Artists in other Asian countries are getting more exposure, not because they are more talented but because their governments and more of their local private institutions recognize the intrinsic value in their contributions and back this up with concrete resources and support. Yet, even without as much government support and private patronage, the Philippine art scene has an enormous asset in being one of the most liberal, poising itself as a nucleus for cultural activity. This advantage will, of course, be stripped away with the passage of the bill and culturally position the Philippines behind its Asian neighbors.
But what does a country that values its culture signal? A country that values its culture — and manifests this tangibly — signals a progressive nation that sees worth in its history, heritage, traditions and the creativity and dynamism of its people. Many governments in places around the world have realized the importance of culture not only in providing a sense of identity but in using it to engineer economic growth. It provides a major component in tourist attraction and boosts confidence in investors to invest in the region. The Guggenheim in Bilbao, Spain, conceived in order to stimulate economic development, has gentrified the area, generated thousands of jobs in employment and annually contributes millions of euros in additional income to the Basque Treasury. In Thailand, cultural tourism is one of the major sources of revenue while in Singapore, the government aggressively promotes and supports cultural activities for tourism and for campaigning the small country as a leading force in the world’s cultural stage. Then there is China, which has palpably been making waves worldwide with the increasing interest in its contemporary art market.
Yet with this bill, as John Silva, commenting on the same issue, wrote in his blog, “Our tourism industry will suffer considerably. If our society loses its unique tourist branding as one of the freest and most liberal in Asia to be replaced with a monastic authoritarian state, then who in their right mind would come and visit a poor version of Saudi Arabia?”
The long-term repercussions of the passage of the bill could be imagined in recalling one of the major cases of artistic intolerance of the 20th century. Adolf Hitler, despite being an undisputed patron and lover of art, particularly despised modern art, which was widely reflected in the Nazi’s cultural policy. These “forbidden” works of art were swiftly purged, sold (to fund the German war machine), burned or exhibited in “degenerate” art exhibitions with minors’ barred from seeing the works’ “obscene” content. Artists and cultural workers all over Europe fled for other countries more hospitable to their ideas. Many landed in New York and, post-World War II, they contributed in situating America as the cultural superpower of the 20th century, which became one of the US’s prime political tools — equating democracy with cultural freedom.
It is not an exaggeration to see possibly similar consequences of Nazi cultural policy to this bill. While artists would probably continue producing as usual, select art activities could be forced to go underground, increasing its isolation from a broader public. In addition, Philippine artists and cultural workers, particularly over the long-term, may simply migrate to other countries that value their artistic contributions more than their own nation does. It is tiring enough for local artists and art organizations to find funding, support and appreciation. But it is simply sickening to impose on the country’s cultural community a bill as unjust as this one.
* * *
To read the full bill, download it from the Senate website at http://www.senate.gov.ph/lis/bill_res.aspx?congress=14&q=SBN-2464.
The author may be e-mailed at letterstolisa@gmail.com. Visit her blog of art writings at http://writelisawrite.blogspot.com.
