Should there be limitations on Artistic Freedom? Satyajit Pattanaik BASICS OF LAW Thu, Aug 13, 2020, at ,08:32 PM There may be no limitation on the imagination of an Artist, but in executing the imagination, limitations are highly solicited. Introduction By giving a liberal interpretation to the Article 19 (1) (a) of The Constitution of India, i.e. from the term " Freedom of Expression " one can easily deduce the interpretation which includes 'Freedom of Art' which is otherwise known as " Artistic Freedom". Article 19 (1) (a) states that "All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression." However, as we know that no Fundamental right in the Constitution of India is absolute. So every fundamental right is subjected to some restrictions, which are known as the 'Reasonable Restrictions.' The Indian Constitution clearly enshrines the reasonable restrictions pertaining to the freedom of speech and expression that it should not hamper the followings; namely; The sovereignty of the State The integrity of the Nation The Security of the state friendly relations between own state and foreign States Public order Decency or morality In relation to contempt of court, and Defamation or incitement to an offence. Restriction to Artistic Freedom in India There should be freedom on the imagination of artists but a limitation on their execution. Artists should not make art which tends to bother people, hurting their sentiments, stirring up nuisance and likewise. Hence, it will be no wrong to say that freedom of expression is only valid when you are not hurting anybody's feelings. Apparently the mentioned Reasonable Restrictions, to the freedom of Speech and Expression, is quite inclusive and exhaustive in nature. So no artist can take shelter Under Article 19(1)(a) by violating the Reasonable Restrictions imposed on it under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. However, there have a lot of negative contentions been raised, which are completely against imposing any kind of limitations on such "Artistic Freedom." Some argue that Art is the medium of Expression by which one can express his thought regarding a particular issue which is the base of the development of a country and no restriction should be imposed on such freedom. However, there are the opposite contentions too, that there should be limitation and restriction to the "Artistic Freedom" and there are also some instances where it has already been witnessed a number of disastrous happenings in various countries. Which I am going to discuss below. Freedom of speech and expression under the American Constitution By virtue of the 1st amendment to the US Constitution freedom of speech and expression is immensely protected from the restrictions of the state and state's federal laws. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. However, laws may restrict the ability of private businesses and individuals from restricting the speech of others, such as employment laws that restrict employers' ability to prevent employees from disclosing their salary with co-workers or attempting to organize a labour union. The First Amendment's freedom of speech right not only prescribes most government restrictions on the content of speech and ability to speak but also protects The right to receive information, Prohibits most government restrictions or burdens that discriminate between speakers, Restricts the tort liability of individuals for certain speech, and Prevents the government from requiring individuals and corporations to speak or finance certain types of speech with which they don't agree. Practical Instances There are some of the practical instances wherein various countries have witnessed a number of the catastrophic situation for not having any kind of restrictions to such 'Artistic Freedom.' Such as Danish Cartoon Controversy case, wherein a huge Religious Controversy was witnessed by virtue of an Art. Then again in the Author Salman Rushdie’s controversy after the publication of his novel, Again in the Painter MF Hussain controversy. All the above cases are the practical instances of damaging human emotions, culture and putting bad examples of artistic freedom. They are discussed below Danish Cartoon Controversy The Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy began after the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published 12 editorial cartoons on 30th September 2005, most of which depicted Muhammad, the principal figure of the religion of Islam. The newspaper announced that this was an attempt to contribute to the debate about criticism of Islam and self-censorship. Muslim groups in Denmark complained, and the issue eventually led to protests around the world, including violent demonstrations and riots in some Muslim countries. Islam has a strong tradition of aniconism, and it is considered highly blasphemous in most Islamic traditions to visually depict Muhammad. This, created with a sense that the cartoons insulted Muhammad and Islam, offended many Muslims. Danish Muslim organisations that objected to the depictions responded by petitioning the embassies of Islamic countries and the Danish government to take action in response and filed a judicial complaint against the newspaper, which was dismissed in January 2006. After the Danish government refused to meet with diplomatic representatives of the Muslim countries and would not intervene in the case, a number of Danish imams visited the Middle East in late 2005 to raise awareness of the issue. They presented a dossier containing the twelve cartoons from the Jyllands-Posten and other information some of which was found to be falsified. As a result, the issue received prominent media attention in some Muslim countries, leading to protests across the world in late January and early February 2006. Some escalated into violence resulting in more than 200 reported deaths, attacks on Danish and other European diplomatic missions, attacks on churches and Christians, and a major international boycott. Some groups responded to the outpouring of protest by endorsing the Danish policies, launching "Buy Danish" campaigns and other displays of support. The cartoons were reprinted in newspapers around the world both in a sense of journalistic solidarity and as an illustration in what became a major news story.[1] In this way, such an Art triggered massive disaster all over the world. Author Salman Rushdie’s controversy The Satanic Verses controversy, also known as the Rushdie Affair, was the heated and frequently violent reaction of Muslims to the publication of Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses, which was first published in the United Kingdom in 1988. Many Muslims accused Rushdie of blasphemy or unbelief and in 1989 the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie. Numerous killings attempted killings, and bombings resulted from angry Muslims over the novel. The Iranian government-backed the fatwa against Rushdie until 1998 when the succeeding government of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said it no longer supported the killing of Rushdie. However, the fatwa remains in place. The issue was said to have divided "Muslim from Westerners along the fault line of culture," and to have pitted a core Western value of freedom of expression that no one " should be killed, or face a serious threat of being killed, for what they say or write, " against the view of many Muslims, that no one should be free to "insult and malign Muslims" by disparaging the "honour of the Prophet" Muhammad. English writer Hanif Kureishi called the fatwa "one of the most significant events in post-war literary history." [2] Painter MF Hussain controversy Here Mr MF Hussain published one disputable picture containing the picture of some veteran and renounced leaders of the world. Out of the four leaders, M. Gandhi is decapitated and Hitler is naked. Hussain hates Hitler and has said in an interview 8 years ago that he depicted Hitler naked so as to humiliate him as he deserves it! How come Hitler’s nudity caused humiliation when in Hussain’s own statement nudity in art depicts purity and is, in fact, an honour! This shows Hussain’s hypocrisy and perversion. The picture which was published by the Artist was Some Other instances There is some more picture which was published in the form of Art and efforts were made to take shelter under the shade of Fundamental Right of speech and expression but it had led to a lot of disturbances. Some of such pictures are given below. The above pictures are the clear indication of misusing the Freedom of Expression and intention to disrupt the public order, or defaming a country and annoy the denizens of the same. So, such kind of freedom should not be left without any Reasonable Restrictions. Conclusion- It is a kind of Humanity that, not art to paint toilet seats with pictures of deity, whiskey bottles in the hands of Goddess Durga, nude pictures of deities, deities on shoes, etc. Such acts should be looked upon as a cognizable offence punishable by law. Such artists are only seeking cheap publicity and morally corrupted. "Self-censorship” should be on artists. Self-censorship is control of what you say or do in order to avoid annoying or offending others, a sudden increase in the number of legal cases being filed against artists, actors and writers for “offending” people has caused great concern in India’s art community. The real problem is that the Indian Government hasn’t done its job in raising the standard of living and education for all Indians. While the middle-class artists long for artistic freedoms and Western-styled excess, the majority is mired in poverty and ignorance and “freedom” seems to bring out only their worst characteristics. Raising the standard of living and making the entire population literate and aware of what a democracy is the only true solution. When artistic freedom is not balanced with an awareness of artistic responsibility which entails social, economic, cultural, and religious contextual sensitivity, one paves the way for licentiousness and artistic perversion masquerading as artistic freedom. Hence there may be no limitation in the imagination of an Artist but when the thing comes to the execution of the same, some limitation is highly solicited. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_controversy , Visited at 8.10 am on 9th April 2017