The international conference named "Taboo seen with the eyes wide open", organized by the Institute of Slavic Languages and Literature at the University of Adam Mickiewicz in Poznań, took place from 7 to 10 December 2009. The conference topics covered contemporary Slavic art and literature with a special focus on taboos - their meaning, functioning and breaking them.

On 7 December the conference organisers opened an accompanying exhibition named "Subversive handicrafts - taboos in the weaving of culture" in the Collegium Maius hall. Two days after the opening the University requested to remove two 'disgusting' artworks by Croatian artists: Roberta Weissman Nagy i Sonja Hržina Majstorović. The works referred to the model of patriarchal culture and the role of women. The curators of the exhibition: Kristina Babošek (Slovenia) i Zvonko Dimoski (Macedonia) decided to remove all the remaining artworks from the display as a sign of support for the artists and protest against censorship.

The act of censorship at the University Collegium Maius was not commented in the media, yet fortunately appeared on the internet: Kristina Babošek described this case on the popular European website devoted to new tendencies in art (www.rhiz.eu) and German Deutschlandradio spread the news about censorship in Poland on the international level. Roberta Weissman Nagy reported violation of artistic freedom to Indeks 73.

None of the Insitute of the Slavic Languages and Literature members wanted to speak with Indeks 73 about the exhibition, therefore we asked Małgorzata Szaefer, a curator and member of the Indeks 73 Laboratory to interview the Faculty of Polish and Classical Philology staff, as well as the Macedonian curator.

The exhibition “Subversive handicrafts: taboos in the weaving of culture”

The curators of the exhibition: Kristina Babošek (Slovenia) and Zvonko Dimoski (Macedonia), currently living in Poznań, decided to present the medium very rarely applied in Polish socially engaged art, namely an old technique of embroidery associated with women and the Balkan tradition of making wall tapestries. The invited artists created works focusing on taboos in social, sexual, national and religious spheres of life. The exhibition fitted in the subject of the conference perfectly, and became a model example of taboos in culture, as it was censored and, eventually, closed.

Two artworks especially evoked lots of controversies: the installation WOMAN-HOUSEWIFE-WHORE-SAINT by Sonja Hržina Majstorović (Croatia) - a large hand, made of sheer pink muslin, stuffed with foam and kitchen utensils and adorned by a pink bra; and INNER BEAUTY by Roberta Weissman Nagy (Croatia), consisting of five sanitary pads finely embroidered with red cotton thread symbolising menstrual blood. Both works referred to the model of patriarchal culture and the role of women.



Who is responsible for removing the works?

After two days of presenting the exhibition (7 and 8 December), Zvonko Dimoski was asked on the phone to remove two works by Croatian artists. This was supposedly requested by Józef Pokrzywniak, Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Polish and Classical Philology. Dimoski and Kristina Babošek decided to remove all remaining works, leaving only their descriptions and empty white sheets of paper on the floor, as a sign of support for the censored artists and protest against censorship.

Professor Pokrzywniak claims he did not order to phone the organisers and tell them to remove the exhibition works and has no idea who did it. He was sure the exhibition ended after two days, as it had been planned. He admits, though, that some professors (Elżbieta Wesołowska – the Head of the Institute of Classical Philology and Tadeusz Lewaszkiewicz) felt indignant at the presentation of “disgusting” objects. Pokrzywniak did not have any objections towards the exhibited artworks, and states one shouldn't be afraid of critical words and debates on the boundaries in art. He also admits collegium Maius is a perfect venue for exhibiting art, which brings this place closer to the humanities.
Who was afraid of the exhibition?

To our surprise, all high-ranked university staff claim they didn't see the exhibition (eg. Professor Józef Pokrzywniak, Professor Anna Legeżyńska – the Vice-Dean responsible for doctoral studies, Professor Alicja Pihan-Kijasowa). The professors state they used another entrance of the building and couldn't see the exhibition in the hall. It is symptomatic the professors didn't even bother to get interested in the exhibition and this way, they managed to avoid to form their own opinion about the event. They only heard the works were “disgusting” and “tasteless”. In their opinion the exhibition was closed due to procedural and technical reasons – a lack of written consent to the presentation. Zvonko Dimoski, however, received such consent.

Other “technical” objections are quite absurd and include, for example, an argument that Collegium Maius is under the conservator's supervision and does not meet the exhibition requirements. Professor Legeżyńska wonders if one can talk about censorship in the case of removing artworks or closing the exhibition, as this term, apparently, refers only to literary censorship. She points out the university's educational offer include gender studies and therefore, the works of two female artists cannot possibly be the reason for removing the display. In her opinion the whole incident is “much ado about nothing”.

Artistic embroidery is not art!

Professor Elżbieta Wesołowska is the only person who openly admits that she reported the exhibition to the Dean and protested against the display, especially 'disgusting' work “Inner Beauty” by Roberta Weissman Nagy. She states she doesn't understand the 'inner' conext of the work, as it refers to 'external feminine discharge'. In her opinion such art, 'if one can call it art at all', should be presented at the venues that are associated with controversial projects, such as galleries, not in the public spaces where one can feel offended. She also states she doesn't understand the message of the work or its symbolic meaning, although she feels she understands art. Now she feels discontented with the fact her intervention brought even more publicity to the 'artist'.

The surprising fact is that none of the conference participants reacted to the removal of the exhibition. Nobody supported the curators and defended the exhibition works, nobody discussed the issues which were the focus of the exhibition and the conference. The whole display was thoroughly interpreted according to realistic conventions of art.
Another striking issue is that all white sheets of paper with a question “What does taboo mean to you?” left by the organisers on the floor of Collegium Maius remained blank. None of the students dared to answer this question. This silence of paper, students and conference participants is truly intriguing, especially in the context of the conference topics.

Is the University of Adam Mickiewicz open to academic debate?

A member of the Indeks 73 Forum wonders what “taboo topics” Alma Mater expected when giving permission to the conference. Is menstrual blood still a taboo? Should we ban the advertisements of sanitary pads and tampons in general? The whole situation is a bit ridiculous: the subject of the conference and attempts to censor the exhibition look like a failed act of political correctness. Still the question remains why students and university staff didn't take a chance of an open debate – did they feel that they had to accept existing rules without questioning or discussing them, or that they had no right to form their own opinions?

Removing the works from the display was a totally new and unknown experience to the Slovenian curator and the Croatian artists. Kristina Babošek was shocked with the lack of reaction and support in Poznań. Even in Catholic Croatia it wouldn't be allowed to remove artworks from the autonomous university space, which should be open to debate and reinterpretation of meanings and contexts. She wrote on the website rhiz.eu:

From reactions shared by individuals and organizations concerned with freedom of speech, it is obvious that a long tradition of censorship in Poland is still alive, just serving another dogma. Let's hope that growing and more determined efforts will soon ensure that values of academic dialogue and true democracy prevail, in order to be able to respectfully share and discuss different opinions and values, as well as exchange achievements of intellectual and artistic creativity.

Full text is available at http://www.rhiz.eu/article-49209-en.html

The artworks of the Poznań exhibition will be presented at the gallery „Modra hiša” in Ljubljana from March to April 2010.


Małgorzata Szaefer
A graduate of the Faculty of Fine Arts at the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Poznań and the Postgraduate Curatorial Studies at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow; a member of the Association “Oto ja” and the Association of Wolsko Fans; a curator specialising in art brut in the context of contremporary art; a grantee of the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage in 2009-2010; a member of the Indeks 73 Laboratory in Poznań.

Cooperation: Lidia Makowska

Translation: Małgorzata Głombiowska