QUITE often, a form of artistic expression, such as theatrical performance, inadvertently gains more public prominence arising from an outburst of protest against it rather than as an outcome of its own publicity initiatives.

This is not to say that producers of artistic expression should be thankful for such “small blessings” especially when the upshot of such an angry protest is sheer censorship of their creative works.

A case in point is the play (not a film, as wrongly claimed by the protesters) Love in Georgetown City, which was staged at penangpac recently. Repeat performances after the first night of their artistic presentation were cancelled under mob pressure.

The protest was mounted by a group of self-styled moral guardians who apparently had not even watched the play and neither did they feel assured by police that the play does not promote free sex, the LGBT lifestyle and other forms of sexual aberration that they curiously envisioned.

It is most unfortunate that the Penang government stood silent to this violation of artistic expression because this is tantamount to its acquiescence, which doesn’t augur well for its professed desire to make George Town a city that is culturally vibrant, as exemplified by its well-known annual George Town Literary Festival.

Indeed, succumbing to such mob pressure is giving a wrong signal to those who are bent on placing obstacles to the growth of the arts in Penang and elsewhere in the country.

It is important to note that the arts is as important as commerce, industry and science in the social, political and intellectual aspects of a progressive nation.  

Moreover, theatrical performances, just like film, dance, music, visual arts, photography and literature, are part and parcel of freedom of expression. Thus, the banning of the said Penang play should not be the concern of only theatre activists and buffs.

A play is generally a popular art form as it can, if done deftly, tackle contemporary issues head on in a way that the audience can relate to, especially if it’s executed through satire and humour.

True, the arts is an arena of struggle because it often allows space for experimentation to a certain degree on the part of the producer as well as being a platform for various interpretations and many degrees of appreciation from the audience. Hence, one would expect the arts to elicit praise as well as provoke criticism, disagreement, controversy or even public protest.

However, disagreement to a particular form of artistic expression should not border on threatened violence to the point of having it banned indirectly by an unruly mob.

Let’s take an example. Certain quarters in our society may not like the screening of horror or ghostly movies in cinemas – which many of them have broken box offices – because, to them, it panders to superstition and the realm of illogic, which are considered unscientific and even insensitive to certain beliefs.

While there may be some individuals who want to stage protest in the cinemas concerned, it would be more intellectually beneficial if such protest takes the form of civilised film reviews, commentaries or public dialogues.

Banning of various forms of artistic expression is generally easy, but it is an epitome of intellectual laziness, if not shallowness – or even sheer arrogance.  

It is only through intellectual engagement, such as literary criticism and dialogue, can members of the public be enlightened about the issue at hand. At the same time, it can help to strengthen our intellectual tradition, if any. Brain is much preferred to brawn in this regard. 

A nation is enriched in various ways, including the hard work and determination of creative people. 

Let not the mob and other detractors make us fall out of love with the arts and intellectual freedom. – February 23, 2019.