I have just read a very eloquent article written by Anish Kapoor about his sculpture 'Dirty Corner' in the gardens of Versailles which was recently vandalised.
I quote "Political violence however is not the same as artistic violence. This political vandalism uses an “art material” (paint) to make actual violence. It could have been a bomb or a hood thrown over someone’s head to kidnap them. Artistic violence is generative, political violence destructive. Artistic violence may scream at the tradition of previous generations. It may violently overturn what was before but in so doing it follows a long tradition of re-generation. It always, however, advances the language of art. Political violence, seeks erasure. Its aim is the removal of the offending idea, person, practice or thing. Simplistic political views are offended by the untidiness of the art object. In this context Art must be seen as obscene and destroyed."
Anish Kapoor - 19 June 2015
The distinction Kapoor makes between the aim of political violence i.e. erasure and the aim of artistic violence which is to advance the language of art is a very telling one. Our Intimate Transgressions exhibition is not seeking to offend anyone for the sake of giving offence, although there probably will be some people who are offended by it, the intention is very different. In keeping with Kapoor's interpretation the exhibition - the artworks in it will be generative and questioning, we hope to advance the language of art, the discourse around sexual violence and 'othering'.
Comment by Fion Gunn 25 June 2015