In the current century, a remarkable phenomenon can be observed, which in many ways is reminiscent of the historical iconoclasms of bygone eras, but is emerging in a different form. While physical destruction of pictorial representations was in the foreground, today a new wave of the iconoclasm is revealed, which is directed against revealing historical paintings.These works are increasingly removed from public exhibitions or withdrawn, while at the same time corresponding content and accounts are blocked on social media. This creates a clear contradiction to the artistic freedom anchored in the Basic Law, since artistic forms of expression that were originally considered cultural heritage are increasingly considered problematic today.
Differentiation of censorship, institutions and platforms
A central element of the current debate is the distinction between state censorship, institutional decisions of museums and the moderation rules of private digital platforms. While state intervention in artistic freedom is particularly sensitive and subject to strict constitutional control, museums have their ownSpace for decision-making in dealing with your collection and presentation of works. Digital platforms, on the other hand, often follow self-established community standards that are not always in line with the understanding of artistic freedom. The question of how these different actors assume their responsibility and what interests they represent is crucial for understandingof the current forms of iconoclasm.
Historical contexts and art historical classification
The removal of historical paintings from exhibitions or their covering is rarely a purely art-scientific decision. Rather, social debates, political currents and media attention play a significant role. Works from the period between the Middle Ages and modernity, which in their contexts of origin as an expression of certain worldviews or artisticideals have been created, today come into the focus of new assessment standards. This means that works that were considered a natural part of the cultural canon for long periods of time are suddenly perceived as offensive. The consequences of this development are far-reaching: Museums are facing the challenge of not only opening up their collections scientifically, but also atto react to social sensitivities.
Digital invisible and moderation
The problem is getting worse in the digital world. Social networks and platforms resort to automated moderation mechanisms that filter images by specific keywords or motives. As a result, historical works of art, regardless of their context, are often equated with contemporary, problematic content and removed. The result is a digital invisibleof art that was still considered worthy of protection in the analogue world. This practice represents a challenge for the teaching of art history, because many works lose their visibility and thus their function as a subject of public debate.
Legal considerations and the protection of artistic freedom
In many countries, freedom of art is a great asset that is protected by constitutions and fundamental rights. A differentiated legal examination is essential, especially when dealing with works that are considered a cultural heritage. Nevertheless, courts and legislators are also coming under increasing pressure to react to social changes and new forms of communication. the weighingThere is a complex between the protection of individual interests and the right to artistic expression and is evaluated differently by different actors. The danger is that without clear guidelines, artistic freedom is gradually restricted.
Consequences for museums, curators and education
The effects of the new iconoclasm are significant for museums and curators. Institutions are forced to remove, cover up or only make limited access to works, which restricts curatorial freedom. The scientific work on the works is made more difficult, and the educational task of the museums, namely the teaching of art and history,disabled. Visitors no longer have complete access to the collections and thus lose the opportunity to critically examine historical ideas of body, morality and aesthetics.
social and cultural consequences
In the long term, this development harbors the danger that the social debate about art, history and morality will become impoverished. When controversial images are systematically hidden, there is no important impetus for discussions about values, taboos and the change in norms. The ability of a society to deal with tension and learn from history is made by invisibleartistic works weakened. Public spaces and digital platforms are losing diversity, and the democratic culture of debate is suffering because important issues can no longer be negotiated openly.
Screenshot youtube.com
