Seizure Of Sally Mann's Photographs In Texas Revives Old Debates About Obscenity And Freedom Of Expression

27th January 2025

The following article is from the Conversation web site. The author Amy Werbel, Professor of the History of Art, Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT) has gathered a large number of links describing the situation and the history of the problem. Whatever your views on censorship this particular exhibition of photographs has surfaced again after more than 30 years and shows censorship of the arts may always surface. To understand the topic in relation to this story you should follow up the links in the original article to gain an understanding of what is going on.

The article

Four photographs by celebrated artist Sally Mann were recently removed from the walls of an exhibition at the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth at the behest of local Republican officials, who claimed they constituted child pornography. The Fort Worth Police Department is now investigating the allegation.

Those photographs - taken more than 30 years ago - feature Mann's children posing in the nude on the family's isolated farm in rural Virginia. They were included in an exhibition titled "Diaries of Home," which also featured images by renowned photographers LaToya Ruby Frazier, Nan Goldin and Catherine Opie, among others.

One of the seized photographs depicts her son's naked torso dripping with a melted popsicle, suggesting the innocence and messiness of childhood. In another, Mann's naked daughter tiptoes across a tabletop, evoking both her strength and vulnerability.

For decades, these works have elicited admiration and, yes, condemnation.

I'm an art historian, and my most recent book documents the rise of art censorship following passage of the nation's first federal anti-obscenity law in 1873, which became known as the Comstock Act after its chief lobbyist, the Christian evangelical activist Anthony Comstock.

Today, the Comstock Act is in the news mostly because it prohibits abortion medication, which was considered a form of obscenity alongside erotic images, sculptures and sex toys. But in the law's early years, it was used to confiscate vast quantities of art and literature deemed lewd, obscene or erotic. Though this form of censorship has since been deemed unconstitutional by various U.S. Supreme Court decisions, debates over what constitutes obscenity, child pornography and artistic expression persist.

To me, the events surrounding the removal of Mann's photographs echo those of a censorious past.

Evangelical underpinnings
Throughout Comstock's career, evangelical Christians served as the most fervent supporters of his work; they were behind the creation of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, which funded his investigations.

Comstock's censorship campaigns varied. Sometimes he went after nude drawings, paintings and sculptures. But even relatively tame photographs of actresses wearing tights attracted his ire.

In Fort Worth, objections originated from local Christian activists and organizations. Chief among them was the Danbury Institute, which penned an open letter to the Fort Worth museum, accusing Mann's photographs of "normalizing pedophilia" and the exhibition more generally of promoting "the breakdown of the God-ordained definition of family" through its depiction of LGBTQ parents. In its mission statement, the institute declares that "Scripture is authoritative, inerrant, infallible, and sufficient."

Comstock similarly believed that "God's Law" ought to be the guiding standard for American jurisprudence. To justify seizing and destroying an enormous array of images and objects during his 43-year career, Comstock often claimed to be battling Satan.

His efforts were broadly popular when it came to the sexually explicit images that tended to circulate in bars and saloons. But he eventually ran afoul of Americans' more liberal and pluralistic attitudes when he targeted art and popular culture.

Courts expand freedom of expression
Over the course of the 20th century, the Comstock Act lost most of its teeth.

Judges and juries increasingly upheld civil liberties claims in cases concerning freedom of expression, vastly expanding the scope of the First Amendment.

In 1973, the Supreme Court established the current three-part "test" for obscenity. The final prong of that test dictates that a work is not obscene if it has "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value."

In my view, there's no credible claim that Mann's long-celebrated photographs do not have serious artistic value.

Following the removal of Mann's photographs, arts advocates were quick to point out that the seized images are featured on prominent museum websites around the country. The National Coalition against Censorship and Artists at Risk organization issued strong statements in support of the exhibition of Mann's photographs.

The Fort Worth sheriff's office, which is holding the images, is reportedly evaluating whether they violate Texas' child pornography statute. But because Mann's photographs do not depict any sexual acts, the only phrase in this state law that could be deemed relevant is "lewd exhibition," with "lewd" defined as an intent to stimulate sexual desire.

Here, context is key. As one critic of the removal of Mann's works pointed out, "Most everyone reading this can easily make a distinction between going to a museum and opening Pornhub."

By selectively removing a few of Mann’s photographs from the exhibition and suggesting they may be child pornography, Texas officials stripped them of their context as works of art. In doing so, they introduced the photographs to an audience that would never have seen them in an art museum but that now may search for them online with prurient intent.

Once again, I can’t help but see a connection to Comstock’s crusades. His efforts backfired, to a degree, in that the targets of his ire, from student drawings of nude models to birth control literature, ended up getting more publicity than they otherwise would have.

Curators also play a role
Despite legal protections, curators are still sensitive to how works of art may offend viewers and have developed a set of practices to accommodate these sensitivities.

Three years ago, I interviewed curators and directors in academic art museums and galleries across the country as a fellow at the University of California National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement.

My research focused on how museum professionals deal with the exhibition of potentially controversial artwork. They spoke to me about a variety of best practices. For example, prominently displayed content warnings allow viewers to choose to opt in or avoid the exhibition altogether. Thoughtful placement of the works and supplemental commentary add more context and provoke thought and discussion.

The curators of "Diaries of Home" clearly followed these best practices.

They stated the objective of their exhibition: to "examine conceptions of home in all their complexity," and to feature the perspectives of women, LGBTQ and nonbinary artists and subjects. A content warning was visible to audiences before they entered the gallery: "This exhibition features mature themes that may be sensitive for some viewers." Museum staff provided wall labels, tours and artist discussions.

These contributions situate the exhibited artworks within a broader conversation about families in America today, which are diverse in makeup, in definition and in lifestyle.

In other words, they show how these are serious, thoughtful works of art.

Although I can’t imagine any sort of successful criminal prosecution will take place, I do think damage has been done. This may have been a goal from the start.

Threatening legal action undoubtedly has a chilling effect. The Modern Art Museum in Fort Worth must grapple with a potential loss of donors. It takes time, money and effort to respond to official and public critics.

In Comstock’s era, civil liberties activists, artists and arts organizations rose to the challenge of defending their freedom of speech.

Those who value artistic expression today will have to follow in their footsteps.

Author
Amy Werbel
Professor of the History of Art, Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT)

Note
This article is from The Conversation web site. To read it with many links which add context including more history and comments from a range of people go [url=https://theconversation.com/seizure-of-sally-manns-photographs-in-texas-revives-old-debates-about-obscenity-and-freedom-of-expression-247321]To read it with many links which add context including more history, the actual photos and comments from a range of people go HERE[/url]

UK
Whilst this current controversy is located n Texas, USA there is a long history of censorship in the UK.

The history of censorship of the arts in the UK is quite extensive and has evolved significantly over time. Here are some key points:

The Licensing Act of 1737: This act introduced state censorship of the theatre, requiring all plays to be approved by the Lord Chamberlain before they could be performed. This was primarily to prevent criticism of the government and the monarchy.

The Theatres Act of 1843: This act reinforced the censorship laws, ensuring that only licensed theatres could perform plays. The Lord Chamberlain's Office had the authority to approve or reject plays, often requiring changes to scripts.

Theatres Act of 1968: This act abolished the Lord Chamberlain's role in theatre censorship, allowing plays to be performed without prior approval. However, it introduced new criminal offences for giving obscene performances or provoking a breach of the peace.

Censorship Beyond Theatre: Censorship has also been applied to other forms of expression, such as literature, cinema, and media. The UK has laws restricting threatening or abusive behaviour, incitement to racial or religious hatred, and obscenity.

Modern Developments: While censorship has been relaxed, there are still restrictions on certain types of content, especially those that could cause harm or distress. The balance between freedom of expression and protecting public order remains a topic of debate.

The Victoria and Albert Museum in London has an exhibition called "Censored! Stage, Screen, Society at 50" that explores the history of censorship in the arts and its impact on creative expression.

There have been several notable art exhibitions in the UK that have faced censorship over the years. Here are a few examples:

Sensitive Content Exhibition (2022): Held at Unit London, this exhibition featured artists who have faced censorship due to their work depicting marginalized groups or addressing controversial topics like sex, beauty, and politics. The exhibition highlighted how these artists continued to create despite facing censorship from art institutions, government bodies, and social media platforms.

Censored! Stage, Screen, Society at 50 (2018): This exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum explored the history of censorship in the arts in Britain, marking 50 years since the Theatres Act 1968 abolished theatre censorship. It included artefacts and displays that showcased how censorship has evolved over time and its impact on artistic freedom2.

Penny Slinger's Collaged Books (1970s): Penny Slinger's collaged books, which depicted sexual and metaphysical imagery, were burned by UK customs. Despite this, she released a 600-illustration volume within a year.

Renee Cox's Last Supper (1999): Renee Cox's interpretation of da Vinci's Last Supper, which featured herself as Jesus, drew criticism from then-New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who called for the defunding of a public museum. Cox defended her right to remake the masterpiece in her own image.

These exhibitions and artworks highlight the ongoing struggle between artistic expression and censorship, and how artists have navigated these challenges to continue creating impactful work.

Censorship in Nazi Germany
Censorship in Nazi Germany was extreme and strictly enforced by the governing Nazi Party, particularly by Joseph Goebbels and his Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. The regime silenced dissenting voices and weaponized all forms of mass communication, including newspapers, music, literature, radio, and film1. They produced and disseminated their own literature to spread Nazi ideology and the Hitler Myth.

One of the most infamous acts of censorship was the book burnings that took place on May 10, 1933, where thousands of books deemed "un-German" were burned. This included works by Jewish authors, political dissidents, and other intellectuals who opposed the Nazi regime.

The Ministry of Propaganda also promoted a cult of personality around Adolf Hitler, using films like Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" to glorify him. Anti-Semitic propaganda films such as "Jud Süß" and "The Eternal Jew" were used to dehumanize and stir up hatred against Jews.

The censorship extended to all aspects of life, including the arts, education, and even personal correspondence. Listening to foreign broadcasts was prohibited, and any form of resistance or criticism was harshly punished.

One notable exhibition that sparked censorship questions in Scotland was the "Degenerate Art Exhibition" held at the McLellan Gallery in Glasgow in 1939. This exhibition showcased artworks that had been banned by the Nazi regime in Germany, including works by avant-garde artists. The exhibition was a response to the widespread persecution of artists under the Nazi regime and aimed to defend the artists whose works were deemed "degenerate" by the Nazis.

The exhibition faced controversy and censorship concerns due to its provocative nature and the political climate of the time. Despite this, it was supported by anti-fascist campaigners and received significant attention

Scotland
Over the past 50 years, the Edinburgh Festival has faced several instances of censorship and controversy:

1963 Nudity Trial: A theatrical "happening" at the International Drama Conference ended with a nude artist's model appearing on a BBC lighting trolley, leading to a well-publicized trial. This event highlighted the growing challenges to traditional morality and conventions in the arts.

1967 Bestiality Play: A play about bestiality caused a significant uproar, reflecting the clash between conservative and liberal views on art and morality.

Self-Censorship: In recent years, some artists have reported self-censoring their work due to concerns about backlash or cancellation. For example, in 2022, a performer mentioned censoring herself to avoid controversy over sensitive topics like Covid-19 and depopulation.

Rosie’s Disobedient Press (2024): This exhibition at the Edinburgh Art Festival explored queer histories and protest within Edinburgh, reflecting on the landscape of the city over the past 20 years. The exhibition included works of textual intervention that appeared in print, on clothing, and across windows and banners throughout the city.

Protests Against Israeli Dance Company (2023): The Edinburgh International Festival faced protests over its inclusion of the Israeli dance company L-E-V. Campaigners argued that the company's inclusion was a form of cultural propaganda by the Israeli government, and organized protests to highlight human rights abuses against Palestinians.

Fossil Fuel Sponsorship Protests (2023): The Edinburgh festivals faced protests over sponsorship from fossil fuel companies. Campaigners and artists objected to the corporate influence on cultural events, highlighting the need for more sustainable and ethical funding sources

These instances show how the Edinburgh Festival has been a stage for cultural debates and challenges to conventional norms over the decades.

One recent controversial art exhibition in Glasgow was the shOUT exhibition at the Gallery of Modern Art (GoMA). This exhibition, which explored the sexuality and lives of LGBT people, faced backlash due to its explicit content. The gallery decided to ban unaccompanied children under 12 from viewing the exhibition, and school visits were cancelled. Despite the controversy, the exhibition received support for addressing important issues related to human sexuality and combating homophobia.

A Thought
Is the current seizure of a set of photographs in a museum in Texas indicative of the start of a slippery slope of coming censorship in the USA generally. Censorship can take many forms and is often used by repressive regimes to silence opposition. To UK citizens it may seem far far away in this case but as part of a wider change going on under a new political set up there may well be repercussions extending across the world.