• Opinion-lead
Opinion

Was this Italian gallery right in removing the Chapman brothers' work?

Posted by James Cartwright,

This week editor James Cartwright wonders whether it was right to remove the Chapman Brothers’ controversial sculpture Piggyback from a Roman gallery or whether it’s an affront to creative freedoms. As ever your comments are welcome below…

This week Piggyback, a 1998 work of art by the British artists Jake and Dinos Chpaman was removed from display at the MAXXI gallery in Rome. It depicts two adolescent girls sat on each other’s shoulders, one with a penis protruding from her mouth, and is part of a series of similar sculptures on children created by the Chapmans over a number of years.

Piggyback was donated to the museum on 2010 when its previous owner Claudia Gian Ferrari passed away, and has been on display since December 2013. But on Saturday the museum took the decision to remove the artwork following a request from the Italian Observatory on the Rights of the Child. They claim to have received numerous complaints from gallery visitors who object to the explicit nature of the sculpture and its supposed promotion of “paedo-pornographic material."

“This is not about an attack on the freedom of artistic expression,” said observatory president Antonio Marziale, “but to avoid promoting depictions with a clear paedopornographic context behind the art.” Context seems to be exactly what Marziale is missing.

Before I start ranting it’s important to note that I’m not a staunch supporter of the Chapman Brothers. I appreciate some of their work, find a lot of it tedious, and was bored to tears by the overblown response to Jake Chapman’s assertion the other week that taking children to art galleries was a “waste of time.” Calm down middle classes of Middle England, his whole intention is to piss you off! But in light of this recent incident I feel bound to defend them both.

Provocative or otherwise it’s important that the Chapman brothers’ work is appreciated in context. Piggyback is shocking to look at, but I don’t think for a second that its intention is to promote paedophilia to a fine art audience. First and foremost it’s a satirical work, but removing it from a gallery suggests its motivations are the same as the very thing it seeks to satirise – that its purpose is arousal and not provocation, that we should accept it instead of question it, and that there is no distinction between representation and reality.

This is a dangerous stance to support, not simply because it threatens creative freedoms, but because it whitewashes the issue and closes down debate. Piggyback is nothing if not shocking, but its power lies in its ability to shock; we look at the sculpture, are moved to disgust and prompted to consider the commodification of child sexuality and the exploitation of minors worldwide. In this sense Piggyback is a powerful piece of anti-paedopornographic propaganda, lampooning a world that allows the abuse of its children. To cover it up may be more convenient to the Observatory’s ideals, but Marziale and the Chapman’s motivations are the same.

If Marziale really wants us to “remember the vile phenomenon” of child pornography then he ought to be sending us all to look at Piggyback. The emotions it provokes may cause us discomfort, but that discomfort reminds us of the rights of our children. “Everyone must agree to promote a culture which is opposed to paedophilia,” says Marziale. But banishing works of art that seek to promote that very culture probably isn’t the best way to go about it.

comments powered by Disqus
Jc

Posted by James Cartwright

James started out as an intern in 2011 and is now one of our two editors. He oversees Printed Pages magazine and content wise has a special interest in graphic design and illustration. He also runs our online shop Company of Parrots and is a regular on our Studio Audience podcast.

Most Recent: Opinion View Archive

  1. Opinion-list

    In the wake of the launch of Printed Pages Autumn 2014, Editor James Cartwright wonders and worries about the secret of designing a great magazine cover and asks for any handy hints you might have. Do him a favour and add your thoughts in the comments section below.

  2. Main

    In light of New York Fashion Week’s main event, a star-studded play put on by Opening Ceremony entitled 100% Lost Cotton, the It’s Nice That team began to ponder their own individual dream play, and what that would look like if they were given the chance to direct it. The results are pretty weird to be honest, but you can’t deny the appeal of each and every one in its own way.

  3. Main

    This week Editor Liv Siddall addresses the world’s distraught reaction to the announcement that MSN Messenger will terminate after 15 years in operation, and wonders if we should get so nostalgic and wet-eyed over technology.

  4. Main

    This week editorial assistant Amy Lewin ponders the cultural impact of the potential England/Scotland split. As ever, feel free to leave comments below.

  5. Main

    We’ve been posting music-related art and design articles on It’s Nice That since the very beginning. In fact the first music video ever posted on It’s Nice That is this one by Koichiro Tsujikawa back in May 2007. Since then we’ve covered countless festival posters and identities, record sleeves, band logos, ad campaigns and tour photography amongst pretty much every other kind of music-related content you can think of, barring only reviewing music itself.

  6. Opinion-list

    This week editor James Cartwright wonders whether it was right to remove the Chapman Brothers’ controversial sculpture Piggyback from a Roman gallery or whether it’s an affront to creative freedoms. As ever your comments are welcome below…

  7. List

    Last week we were duped into running a project on the site that turned out to be a hoax. Here Rob Alderson explains what happened and why it’s left an unsavoury taste, while James Cartwright disagrees and congratulates the artist on a spoof well done. As ever you can leave your thoughts using the discussion thread below…

  8. List

    Two weeks ago we featured DesignStudio’s Airbnb logo. One week ago copywriter Rob Mitchell of We All Need Words wrote an Opinion piece calling for an end to convoluted brand stories. His article was cheered by some people and incensed others; Sam Peskin and Liam Hamill of VentureThree want to have their say and defend brand strategy. Again you can add your views using the comment thread below…

  9. List

    We were pretty impressed with the new Airbnb logo when it launched last week, but for a different perspective, here’s Rob Mitchell from We All Need Words. He tells us why he’s had enough of “over-cooked brand stories masquerading as strategy” and as ever you can add your thoughts below…

  10. List

    In light of our recent changes and the launch of the new-look Design Observer, Rob Alderson reflects on design websites’ redesigns. As ever you can add your thoughts using the comment thread below, and we’re particularly keen to hear what you’re making of our new look!

  11. List

    This week James Cartwright wonders what the V&A is up to with its policy of “Rapid Response Collecting” and whether it really marks a shift in their curation policy. As ever you can add your thoughts using the discussion thread below.

  12. List

    This week Rob Alderson considers the aftermath of the disastrous Robin Thicke Twitter Q&A and wonders how it was ever signed off when what was going to happen seemed entirely predictable. As ever you can add your thoughts using the discussion thread below.

  13. Opinion-list

    This week assistant editor Maisie Skidmore asks what makes a good group show. Are they really all they’re cracked up to be, or are they poised for failure? Tell us what you think of them and which you’ve been to that were especially brilliant or terrible in the comments section below.