[Debate] The president's penis,Gillian Schutte

[Riaz K Tayob]

Thanks for this info, it certainly helps place the work. On one level it 
takes out of the race level, from the perspective of the artist being 
racist. On the other hand it does feed representations of black people 
in a particular light, that is as a view as it stands in the world on 
its own.

Of course there are some taboos in society (even England at the time of 
the Rushdie scandal had laws proscribing the desecration of 
Christianity) and these need to be faced up to, either re-affirmed or 
revised or updated. What bothers me is that somehow there is a "liberal" 
tendency to seek the truth in the "extremes" - that somehow the truth is 
associated with shock value. This is problematic, besides serving as 
some form of "authenticity" substitute in an ersatz world of 
post-modernism, as there are other means of representation (as Schutte 
points out) as well as civil discourse that does not allow the medium to 
get confused with the message.

The issue of disrespect for the presidency as an institution is 
something that needs to be taken seriously. But if the state does not 
take itself seriously and demands respect instead of commanding it then 
I guess it is "no-holds barred" in terms of shaping the conflict. We do 
not live in a society where scandals are followed by resignations - to 
respect the institutions of the state - but quite the opposite. So on 
the one hand I support the artistic license of Murray but feel that this 
was not the best way to make such a critique. Public figures have to be 
subject to greater levels of scrutiny than others.

On 2012/05/27 03:08 AM, Vanessa Banton wrote:
> The author concerned has not in anyway analysed any of Brett Murray's
> past artworks, wherein penises feature quite prominently in his
> critique of for example, the former government.
>
> On 5/27/12, Riaz K Tayob<riaz.tayob at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>    Features
>>
>>
>>      The president's penis
>>
>>