​​

​Here is the entire article by the esteemed Mr. Canvasius freeborn.

​

​

Esteemed Dr. Paul Thompson, Professor Ken Neil and Yique,

 

I am writing to you in response to a recent news article published on your platform, which can be found at the following link: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-08/graffiti-battle-erupts-on-london-street-over-chinese-politics

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/07/chinese-political-slogans-spark-graffiti-free-for-all-on-east-london-wall-brick-lane

 

I wish to begin by expressing gratitude to the media for their balanced coverage of the Brick Lane graffiti incident. Writing under the pseudonym Canvassius Freeborn, an observer of the cultural interplay between China and the West, I find myself compelled to write on this matter. However, the weight of this incident demands that I maintain anonymity.

 

The core issue at hand is more profound than it appears. The persecution of artists for their freedom of speech and creativity is not a new narrative. Historically and currently, such witch hunts have been rampant in totalitarian China. Today, the West witnesses a similar pattern, albeit with overseas Chinese groups at the helm. Nietzsche aptly captures the essence of this situation: "He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself." Rather than a discussion on art, this incident has evolved into a platform for online violence, extremism, and threats to personal safety. These acts of cyber violence and advocacy of crime cannot be tolerated in any civilized country. Although many critics emanate from overseas Chinese groups, it's essential to recognize that their grievances are rooted not in the artist's work but in the overarching shadow of totalitarianism. Echoing the words of renowned Chinese writer Lu Xun, "When a brave man is angry, he draws his sword on someone stronger, while an angry coward draws his sword on someone weaker."

 

Graffiti is a collective act, and the artist's companions who went with him to graffiti, whether they are other Chinese or British classmates or friends, seem to be ignored by the bullying, and he is the only one who bears the attacks at homeland and abroad. This selective targeting raises troubling questions about the underlying motivations of the attackers. Just imagine, what if an Englishman did the same graffiti? Is being Chinese itself an original sin? This disparity in reaction cannot be overlooked, for it reveals a disturbing bias that transcends the artwork itself and implicates broader social and cultural dynamics. I am very saddened by this situation, and it's unjust for the artist to bear the weight of such widespread grievances, especially when the real battle is against a system, not an individual.

 

In light of this incident, I am deeply cognizant of the potential threat it poses to the foundational values of the West, notably the freedom of speech and artistic expression. Being deeply embedded in this field, I grasp the weighty implications it presents. Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere emphasizes the significance of unhindered participation in public discourse. Therefore, even if I don't always concur with every artist's viewpoint, I passionately advocate for their right to express themselves. However, the 'Chilling Effect' instigated by this digital witch-hunt compels me to adopt anonymity, even when discussing events in the UK, a place historically revered for its commitment to free speech. This irony is stark, compelling us to ponder the alarming parallels between online mob behavior and tactics employed by totalitarian regimes. This situation raises a pivotal question: How does the online vilification of artists distinguish itself from the harsh suppression of dissent in countries like China? Observing hints of such oppressive tendencies in the UK, eerily similar to those in more stringent societies, is deeply disconcerting.

 

I wish to underscore that the heart of this incident serves as an examination of the United Kingdom's stance on freedom of speech, a principle that has long been foundational to Western democracies. As a nation, the UK has traditionally positioned itself as a steadfast defender of this fundamental right. The current situation, however, raises serious questions regarding the UK's willingness to uphold this commitment. If the nation appears to evade or diminish its responsibility in protecting freedom of speech, particularly within the context of its student population, it could lead to widespread skepticism concerning the sincerity of its devotion to these principles. Such a failure could have far-reaching ramifications, undermining the very fabric of societal structures that have been constructed upon the bedrock of free expression. The potential consequences are not merely alarming but could be seen as a betrayal of Western values, signifying a surrender of freedom and rational discourse to the forces of violence and authoritarianism. This outcome, undoubtedly undesirable, prompts us to question when Britain's resolve began to waver, and why it might appear to some as increasingly timid or disenchanted with its own ideals. It is imperative to recognize that this incident is not an isolated occurrence but may be indicative of a broader crisis in the preservation of free speech within the UK. It serves as a litmus test, gauging whether British society is prepared to confront such challenges with integrity or whether it may succumb to compromise. This is a complex and urgent matter that necessitates thoughtful reflection from all those invested in the principles that guide our democratic societies.

 

In fact, Qique's performance art, marked by the graffiti on the wall, serves merely as an entry point to a broader realm of artistic expression. Its relative simplicity, perhaps even unintentional, belies its profound impact. Such a piece stands as a testament to the transformative power of art and could very well find its place in performance art textbooks. The sweeping public response it garnered not only reiterates Britain's unwavering commitment to freedom of speech but also magnifies the nation's readiness to engage with art, irrespective of personal alignment with the values it represents.

 

Although I approach this as a 'spectator', my expertise in art criticism and insights into the East-West art dynamics drive me to analyze this incident deeply. I urge prudence and rationality in its interpretation. Hence, I've penned the subsequent article in this letter titled 'The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech.' Recognizing that the letter and article are complementary in nature, I recommend that they be published together to offer a more comprehensive perspective on this critical issue. I welcome publications, comments, and discussions on the content, but I kindly request that my original text remain intact, preserving the essence and integrity of my analysis. I deeply appreciate your trust and the pivotal role of media and educators in shaping public discourse.

 

To some readers, particularly those who may not have undergone systematic political science training, there's a possibility my endorsement of Yique's right to free speech could be misconstrued as support for totalitarianism. I wish to clarify: My advocacy centers on the fundamental principle of freedom of speech. It does not necessarily align with or endorse the specific content Yique—or any other artist—chooses to express. Crucially, this letter emanates from my deep-seated opposition to totalitarianism. We must recognize, as Hannah Arendt insightfully elucidated in 'The Origins of Totalitarianism,' that countering dictatorship with dictatorial methods risks inadvertently entrenching the very systems we oppose. Arendt's exploration of totalitarian regimes emphasizes how resistance movements, when adopting the tactics of the oppressors, can inadvertently pave the way for a new form of tyranny. It's not merely about overthrowing a regime; it's about ensuring the foundational principles upon which a new order is built do not mirror the oppressive methods of the old. For example, when the Bolsheviks sought to overthrow their oppressors, the tactics they employed—like secret police and purges—became entrenched hallmarks of the subsequent regime, illustrating the dangerous trajectory of mimicking oppressive methods.

 

Lastly, I earnestly hope the Royal College of Art continues to uphold its tradition of fairness and transparency in addressing Yique's case. Adherence to academic guidelines, free from external influences—especially from intense online sentiment—should remain paramount.

 

I wish to highlight that this correspondence is an open letter, shared with esteemed media outlets including The Guardian, BBC, Bloomberg, and CNN. My intent is to foster a comprehensive dialogue on this crucial matter, ensuring that diverse perspectives are both aware of and contributing to this discourse.

 

Sincerely,

Canvassius Freeborn

 

 

 

​

尊敬的Paul Thompson博士、Ken Neil教授和Yique先生/女士，

我写信是为了回应您平台最近发表的一篇新闻文章，链接如下：

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-08/graffiti-battle-erupts-on-london-street-over-chinese-politics https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/07/chinese-political-slogans-spark-graffiti-free-for-all-on-east-london-wall-brick-lane

首先，我要对媒体对Brick Lane涂鸦事件的平衡报道表示感谢。作为一个以Canvassius Freeborn为笔名的观察者，我被文化在中西之间的相互影响所吸引，因此我感到有必要就此事件发表一些看法。然而，这个事件的重要性要求我保持匿名。

事实上，此次事件的核心问题比表面看起来要深刻得多。对艺术家因言论自由和创造力受迫害并非新的故事。在历史和现实中，这种类似的猎巫行为在中国极权统治下屡见不鲜。如今，西方也在目睹类似的情况，尽管领导这种行为的是海外华人团体。尼采恰如其分地捕捉到了这种情况的本质：“与龙战斗久了，人也会变成龙。”这次事件已经不再仅仅是有关艺术的讨论，而是演变成了一个在线暴力、极端主义和对人身安全的威胁的平台。这些网络暴力行为和鼓吹犯罪的行为在任何文明国家中都是不可容忍的。尽管许多批评者来自海外华人团体，但必须认识到，他们的不满不是源于艺术家的作品，而是源于极权主义的阴影。引用著名的中国作家鲁迅的话：“勇敢的人生气了，向比他强大的人挥剑，怯懦的人生气了，却向比他弱小的人挥剑。”

涂鸦是一种集体行为，与艺术家一同前往涂鸦的同伴，无论是其他中国人、英国同学还是朋友，似乎都被忽视了，只有他一个人承受了来自国内外的攻击。这种有选择性的针对性行为引发了令人不安的问题，涉及攻击者潜在的动机。试想一下，如果是一个英国人做了同样的涂鸦，情况会怎么样？难道仅仅因为是中国人就成了原罪？这种反应上的不平等不容忽视，因为它揭示了一个令人不安的偏见，超越了作品本身，牵涉到更广泛的社会和文化动态。我为这种情况感到非常难过，艺术家承受了如此广泛的不满，尤其是在真正的斗争是与一个体制，而不是一个个体相对立的情况下，这是不公正的。

鉴于此事件，我深刻认识到它对西方的基本价值观所构成的潜在威胁，尤其是言论自由和艺术表达自由。作为深度参与这个领域的人，我理解它所带来的重大影响。尤尔根·哈贝马斯关于公共领域的概念强调了在公共话语中无障碍参与的重要性。因此，即使我不总是赞同每位艺术家的观点，我也强烈主张他们表达自己的权利。然而，这次数字猎巫所导致的“寒蝉效应”迫使我匿名，即使在讨论英国的事件时也是如此，历史上因坚守言论自由而备受尊敬的英国。这种讽刺之处鲜明，促使我们思考在线暴民行为与极权政权采取的战术之间的惊人相似之处。这种情况引发了一个关键问题：艺术家的网络谴责如何与像中国这样的国家对异见的严厉打压区分开来？在英国观察到类似于更严格社会的压制倾向，这种类似的情况令人深感不安。

我希望强调，此次事件的核心问题在于对英国在言论自由方面的立场，这一原则长期以来一直是西方民主的基础。作为一个国家，英国传统上一直将自己定位为坚定捍卫这一基本权利的国家。然而，目前的情况引发了关于英国是否愿意履行这一承诺的严肃问题。如果英国似乎回避或减少了保护言论自由的责任，尤其是在其学生群体中，这可能会导致人们对其对这些原则的奉献的诚意产生普遍怀疑。这种失败可能会产生深远的后果，不仅令人担忧，而且可能被视为对西方价值的背叛，标志着自由和理性辩论向暴力和威权主义力量的投降。这种结果无疑是不可取的，促使我们思考英国的决心何时开始动摇，以及为什么在某些人看来，其越来越胆怯或对自己的理念感到愈发厌倦。必须认识到，这次事件并不是一个孤立事件，而可能预示着英国在维护言论自由方面存在更广泛危机。它是一个试金石，衡量英国社会是否准备以诚信面对这些挑战，还是是否会屈服于妥协。这是一个复杂而紧迫的问题，需要所有投身于指导我们民主社会的原则的人进行深思熟虑。

事实上，Yique的表演艺术，以墙上的涂鸦为标志，仅仅是更广泛的艺术表达领域的一个切入点。它的相对简单性，甚至可能是无意识的，掩盖了它深远的影响。这样的作品证明了艺术的变革力量，很可能会在表演艺术教材中找到自己的位置。它引发的广泛公众反应，不仅重申了英国对言论自由的坚定承诺，还放大了国家准备接触艺术的意愿，无论个人是否与其所代表的价值观一致。

尽管我以“旁观者”的身份来看待这个问题，但我在艺术批评方面的专业知识和对中西艺术动态的深刻了解驱使我对此事件进行深入分析。我敦促在解释时谨慎和理性。因此，我在此信件中为这篇文章撰写了后续部分，标题为“Brick Lane涂鸦事件：对海外华人艺术家的猎巫行为及英国在维护言论自由方面的危机”。考虑到这封信和文章在性质上是互补的，我建议将它们一同发布，以便更全面地展示这一重要问题的观点。我欢迎出版、评论和对内容的讨论，但我恳请保留我的原始文本，以保持分析的精髓和完整性。我非常感谢您的信任以及媒体和教育工作者在塑造公共话语方面所扮演的关键角色。

对于一些读者，尤其是那些可能没有接受过系统政治科学培训的人来说，我的支持Yique的言论自由权利可能会被误解为支持极权主义。我希望澄清：我主张的是言论自由的基本原则。这不一定与或支持Yique或任何其他艺术家选择表达的具体内容相一致。至关重要的是，这封信源自我对极权主义的深切反对。我们必须认识到，正如汉娜·阿伦特在《极权主义的起源》中深刻阐述的那样，用专制的方法来对抗专制主义，往往会不经意地巩固我们所反对的体系。阿伦特对极权政权的探讨强调，抵抗运动在采取压迫者的战术时，可能会无意中为新的暴政铺平道路。这不仅仅是推翻一个政权的问题，更关键的是确保建立新秩序的基本原则不会反映出旧秩序的压迫性方法。例如，当布尔什维克试图推翻压迫者时，他们采取的战术，如秘密警察和清洗，成为随后政权的标志性特点，说明了模仿压迫性方法的危险轨迹。

最后，我真诚地希望皇家艺术学院能够继续坚持在处理Yique案件时的公平和透明传统。遵循学术准则，摆脱外部影响，特别是摆脱来自强烈的在线情绪的影响，应该始终是最重要的。

我希望强调，这封信是一封公开信，已分享给受尊敬的媒体机构，包括《卫报》、BBC、彭博社和CNN。我意图促进关于这一重要问题的全面对话，确保各种观点不仅意识到这一问题，而且还在为这一话题作出贡献。

​

诚挚地致意，

Canvassius Freeborn

 

 

 

"The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech"

 

Canvassius Freeborn

 

 

Introduction

 

The vibrant art scene of London's Brick Lane recently became the epicenter of a complex controversy that offers a sobering look at the challenges of political art in our hyperconnected world. A group of artists, including Chinese artist Yique, painted a Chinese government slogan promoting the country's "socialist core values" on a public wall. The artwork, intended as a reflection on diverse environments and attitudes, rapidly evolved into a palimpsest of political dissent. However, the online reaction to the artwork took a troubling turn, with the artists becoming targets of personal attacks, threats, and invasions of privacy.

 

 

Disturbing Instances of Online Aggression

 

The offensive remarks and threats directed at the artists present a stark picture of the disturbing extent of online aggression. For instance, comments like, 'Can I donate to the Hong Kong group (that wants to buy your skull)  哪个香港组织啊 我能捐款吗?' (___meplz  https://www.instagram.com/___meplz) and 'I'll pay ten thousand 😍, DM me quickly 我出一万😍快速dm我' (tamako1312 https://www.instagram.com/tamako1312) are not just cruel taunts but borderline criminal threats, utterly unacceptable in any civilized society. Unfortunately, similar intimidation and threats appear to be all too common on social media platforms, including Twitter, Reddit, and Instagram. This represents merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the pervasive issue of online aggression and violence, raising urgent questions about the role and responsibility of these platforms in moderating and preventing such behavior.

 

Even more disconcerting is that these threats were not isolated but seemed to be part of a larger, more concerted effort to intimidate and harass the artist and his team, extending even to their families. These instances crossed the line from critique or disagreement over the artwork into the realm of personal attacks and threats, illustrating a darker side of online discourse.

 

This disturbing response reveals a paradox. While the critics, like the artists, might share the same intent to critique the Chinese government's policies, their misdirected aggression ironically turned the artists into targets. This misplaced criticism, far removed from a reasoned and respectful discourse, has profound implications. It not only highlights the darker side of digital discourse, but also potentially creates a chilling effect on artists, particularly Chinese artists living abroad, who might fear similar backlash for their politically themed works—even when they intend to express their critique ironically.

 

It should be noted that, this paradox can be further illuminated by Roland Barthes' concept of 'the death of the author.' According to Barthes, the interpretation of a work should be divorced from the author's intentions or background. Therefore, regardless of whether the artist intended to support or critique the Communist Party, the artwork itself, as perceived by the audience, carried a satirical effect.

 

The severity of this backlash, as evidenced by the offensive and even threatening remarks launched at the artists, underscores the need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression. It calls for a nuanced understanding of art that recognizes the distinction between the work itself and the author's intent, as proposed by Barthes.

 

 

Artistic Freedom and Expression in the UK

 

In the United Kingdom, freedom of speech and artistic expression are held in high regard and enshrined in law under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." While this Article allows for certain restrictions "as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society," it fundamentally ensures that artists can express a broad range of ideas and critique various aspects of society, including politics. This artistic freedom contributes to open discussion, challenges assumptions, and promotes empathy and understanding, all of which are crucial elements of a healthy democratic society.

 

Artistic freedom is a cornerstone of democratic societies. It encapsulates the right of artists to express themselves freely, without fear of censorship or punishment. This freedom is pivotal for the creation of politically-charged art, which often plays a crucial role in challenging prevailing narratives, provoking discussion, and stimulating societal change.

 

In this context, we must recognize that even if an artwork includes a message from the Chinese Communist Party, the artists have the right to express this as part of their creative and political commentary. Famous examples like Ai Weiwei's 'Sunflower Seeds,' a critique of mass production and conformity within Chinese society, and Badiucao's politically charged cartoons that often challenge the Chinese government's policies, highlight the importance of artistic freedom in political commentary. The controversy surrounding the Brick Lane artwork brings into sharp focus the value of these freedoms and the need to safeguard them. It underscores the importance of maintaining a space where artists can express diverse views, even when those views might provoke disagreement or controversy.

 

However, while these freedoms are cherished, they should not be used to justify aggression or harassment against individuals or to stifle creative freedom through fear and intimidation. The offensive and threatening remarks directed at the artists involved in the Brick Lane incident cross this line and represent a clear violation of the artists' rights. They serve as a stark reminder of the need to balance the principle of freedom of expression with the imperative to protect individuals from harm.

 

Politically-charged art, by its nature, can be controversial, often sparking strong reactions from different quarters of society. These reactions can lead to vibrant, meaningful discourse, fostering a greater understanding of complex issues. However, they can also result in negative outcomes, as we've seen in the Brick Lane incident, where artists faced personal attacks and threats as a consequence of their work.

 

In an ideal world, controversial art would lead to nuanced and respectful debates, with disagreements focusing on the art itself rather than on personal attacks against the artist. Such debates would examine the artwork's aesthetics, symbolism, intention, and social context, fostering intellectual discourse that enriches our understanding of both the art and the issues it explores. However, the reality, as evidenced by the incident in Brick Lane, is often far from this ideal. Instead of constructive dialogue, controversial art can trigger emotional reactions that overshadow thoughtful engagement. Personal biases, political allegiances, or preconceived notions may drive these reactions, leading to ad hominem attacks against the artist rather than a considered examination of the artwork. This shift from artistic critique to personal assault not only stifles meaningful discussion but also creates a hostile environment that can deter artists from taking risks or exploring challenging themes. The Brick Lane incident serves as a poignant reminder of the need for a more balanced and respectful approach to controversial art, one that honors the complexity of both the artwork and the debates it may inspire.

 

The backlash faced by the artists underscores a key challenge for artistic freedom in the digital age: the ease with which online platforms can be used to amplify negative reactions and transform them into harmful personal attacks. This trend, if left unchecked, threatens to undermine artistic freedom, creating a chilling effect that could dissuade artists from engaging with politically sensitive topics.

 

In democratic societies like the UK, where freedom of speech and artistic expression are protected by law, it is important to ensure that these freedoms are not undermined by online aggression. As the incident in Brick Lane shows, there is a pressing need to foster a digital culture that respects these freedoms while discouraging harmful behavior.

 

In balancing these considerations, it is important to remember the value of politically-charged art and its role in fostering societal critique and political progress. Despite the potential for controversy, such art can be a powerful tool for challenging assumptions, stimulating discussion, and promoting understanding. Its importance underscores the need to protect artistic freedom and ensure that artists can continue to express their views without fear of personal attacks or threats.

 

 

The Dangers of Rigidity: Understanding the Fluidity of Artistic Expression

 

The incident at Brick Lane provides a profound reflection on the myriad ways art is perceived, interpreted, and critiqued. At its core, the controversy reveals an unsettling tendency among certain observers to categorically dismiss what they don't immediately understand or what doesn't conform to their preconceived notions of what art "should" be.

 

This narrow-mindedness — the act of force-fitting contemporary art into classical or traditional molds — is not just an oversight; it's a significant disservice to the artist and the broader art community. In doing so, these individuals deny themselves the opportunity to engage with the artwork on a deeper, more meaningful level. They miss out on the nuances, the underlying messages, the socio-political commentary, and the broader narratives often embedded within contemporary art forms.

 

Such a restrictive perspective is reminiscent of an authoritarian approach to art interpretation, where only one 'correct' view or interpretation is permitted, and all others are delegitimized or outright dismissed. This is not merely a matter of aesthetic preference; it becomes a curtailing of the very essence of art – its capacity to challenge, to provoke, to inspire, and to defy categorization.

 

Furthermore, art, by its very nature, is evolutionary. It reflects the zeitgeist of its time, capturing the ethos, dilemmas, and aspirations of the society in which it is birthed. To confine it within rigid boundaries is to stifle its potential and to mute the voices of those who seek to express, critique, and comment on the world around them through their creations.

 

It is disheartening to witness such ignorance and authoritarianism in art interpretation. However, it also underscores the critical importance of art education, open dialogue, and fostering a culture of appreciation that looks beyond the surface and delves into the deeper layers of artistic expression. Only then can we truly appreciate the multifaceted gem that is contemporary art, in all its complexity, diversity, and beauty.

 

 

Echoes of the Past: Persecutions and Witch-Hunts in Contemporary Art?

 

History is replete with instances where artists, as the vanguard of societal critique and change, have been persecuted for their creative endeavors. The inked strokes of their artistry, intended to stimulate thought, instead become the very chains that bind them, making them vulnerable to misinterpretations and subsequent witch hunts. The contemporary digital age, with its virality and echo chambers, exacerbates this phenomenon, often turning nuanced artistic expressions into combustible flashpoints of division.

 

A chilling historical reference is the "Degenerate Art Exhibition" of 1937, organized by the Nazi regime in Munich. Intended to deride and marginalize modernist, abstract, and avant-garde art, this event led to the confiscation and destruction of thousands of artworks. Artists, in the wake of this exhibition, found themselves marginalized, dismissed from teaching positions, and some even faced arrest. Similarly, during Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution in China from 1966 to 1976, artists influenced by Western styles or those perceived as not adhering to Communist ideology were publicly humiliated, persecuted, or sent to re-education camps. The campaign, driven by the objective to purge capitalist and traditional Chinese cultural elements, led to the destruction of countless historical artifacts, books, and artworks.

 

The Brick Lane incident is emblematic of this peril. Yique’s graffiti, a satirical play on China's "socialist core values", was not merely content to be confined within the boundaries of its painted brick canvas. Instead, it spilled over, triggering impassioned debates, fervent supports, and, unfortunately, vitriolic persecutions fueled by anonymous online mobs. Such reactions, while indicative of art's enduring power to provoke, also underscore the treacherous terrains artists often find themselves navigating, especially in our hyperconnected world.

 

Artistic misinterpretation, particularly when combined with the potent mix of political sentiments, can lead to repercussions that are both swift and severe. For artists, especially those like Yique who grapple with politically charged themes, the personal costs can be staggering. They find themselves at the eye of storms that swirl with misdirected anger, often becoming the victims of character assassinations, online harassments, and even threats to their physical safety.

 

It's a sobering paradox. Artists, by their very nature, challenge conventions, question societal norms, and spark dialogues. However, in an era where rapid digital reactions often override reflective responses, their art can be stripped of its nuances, reduced to simplistic binaries, and weaponized against them. The ensuing witch hunts, fueled by misinterpretations and amplified by online mobs, can be relentless and ruthless.

 

Such persecutions carry ominous implications for free speech and artistic expression. At its core, art is a dialogue—a conversation between the artist and society. When artists are persecuted, this dialogue is stifled, replaced by monologues of mistrust and fear. The cacophony of threats and harassments drowns out the symphonies of critique and introspection, impoverishing the very fabric of our cultural discourse.

 

For societies that pride themselves on democratic values, it's imperative to recognize and counteract these witch hunts. It necessitates a collective introspection to understand why and how artistic expressions, intended as mirrors to society, are instead weaponized as mallets of persecution.

 

Moreover, as advocates of art and its transformative potential, we bear the onus to rally around persecuted artists, providing them with the support and platforms they need to continue their invaluable work. The challenge is not just to defend their right to express but to ensure that their expressions are engaged with depth, respect, and understanding. We cannot, and must not, allow the tragedies of history to repeat themselves in our digital era.

 

 

The Chilling Effect and Misdirected Criticism

 

Such incidents, coupled with the violent and personal nature of the attacks, risk creating a chilling effect on artists, particularly those of Chinese descent living abroad. They may become hesitant to express their views, especially if their work touches on politically sensitive subjects or critiques powerful entities like the Chinese government.

 

A case in point is an artist in Bristol, identified here as 'S,' who wanted to satirize the Chinese government through their work but was deterred by the fear of similar backlash. This chilling effect could stifle artistic innovation and reduce the diversity of voices in the public discourse. As a result, it could undermine the vital role of art as a medium for societal critique and political progress.

 

The irony of this situation is hard to overlook: critics, who ostensibly share the artists' intent of critiquing the Chinese government's policies, instead turn their aggression towards the artists themselves. This misdirected criticism not only detracts from the substance of the critique, but also creates a hostile environment that may deter artists from expressing their views.

 

This disconcerting scenario underlines the pressing need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression. While freedom of speech is a cherished democratic principle, it should not extend to threatening or harassing individuals or stifling creative freedom through fear and intimidation. The severity of this backlash, as evidenced by the offensive and even threatening remarks launched at the artists, underscores the need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression.

 

The incident in Brick Lane raises critical questions about the dynamics of artistic freedom, online discourse, and the role of art in political critique. How can artists navigate the fine line between expressing dissent and provoking unintended hostility? How can we foster a digital culture that encourages meaningful critique and debate instead of aggression and bullying? And crucially, how can we ensure that the chilling effect of online violence does not stifle artistic innovation and its role in societal progress? These are some of the pressing issues that this incident urges us to reflect upon.

 

 

Artistic Innovation and Political Progress Under the Chilling Effect

 

Artistic innovation thrives on the freedom to experiment, to push boundaries, and to explore a wide range of themes, including those that are politically sensitive. When artists face threats and online aggression for their politically-charged works, it can stifle this innovation. The chilling effect created by such a hostile climate can lead artists, especially those dealing with contentious issues, to self-censor or to avoid certain topics altogether. This not only limits the artists' creative potential, but also impoverishes the cultural and political discourse that their works could have stimulated.

 

A vibrant and diverse art scene acts as a mirror to society, reflecting its complexities, challenging its assumptions, and sometimes provoking uncomfortable conversations that are nonetheless essential for progress. The fear of backlash, as exemplified by the incident in Brick Lane, can dull this mirror, reducing the art scene's vibrancy and its potential to contribute to social critique and political discourse.

 

Moreover, art serves as a catalyst for societal critique and political discourse. Through their works, artists can highlight injustices, question prevailing narratives, and offer new perspectives on complex issues. When artists are deterred from dealing with political themes, we lose an essential avenue for such critique and discourse.

 

Ultimately, the potential chilling effect of online aggression on artistic innovation doesn't just harm the artists involved, it deprives society as a whole of valuable insights and perspectives. It underscores the pressing need for a robust defence of artistic freedom and a concerted effort to create a more respectful and inclusive digital culture.

 

The incident in Brick Lane serves as a potent reminder of the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the safety and dignity of individuals. It invites us to reflect on the role each of us can play in fostering a climate that respects both these essential principles. This includes policymakers who can shape the legal and regulatory framework, social media platforms that can moderate online behavior, and individuals who can contribute to a respectful and constructive discourse.

 

In the final analysis, ensuring that artists can continue to innovate and contribute to societal critique and political progress requires a collective commitment to protecting artistic freedom, promoting respectful discourse, and curbing online aggression. This commitment is essential to maintaining a vibrant art scene and a healthy democratic society.

 

 

Conclusion: The Crisis of Free Speech in the UK and The Perilous Odyssey of a Chinese Artist's Creative Endeavour

 

The intensity of the backlash over a seemingly minor incident—a few students painting a wall—reveals deep-seated tensions rooted in the high pressure of China's totalitarianism. The core of people's opposition lies in totalitarian policy, not the artist, who has become an inadvertent scapegoat. This misplaced blame raises disconcerting questions: How does this behavior differ from totalitarianism itself? The absurdity of this situation, unfolding even in the UK, exposes a troubling lack of social conscience and empathy.

 

This incident is a stark reminder of the fragile state of free speech in the UK, especially when it comes to politically charged art. The artist's plight—whether intentional or not—serves as a tragic testament to the potential perils of artistic expression. The fallout may cast a shadow over the Chinese diaspora art community, leading to self-censorship and the stifling of artistic voices, further impoverishing the diversity of global artistic discourse.

 

Friedrich Nietzsche's words resonate here: “He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself; and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you.” The peril of becoming what one condemns reflects a crisis in understanding, not just of contemporary art but of the values underpinning free expression. 

 

Moreover, the incident exposes a crisis in the UK's commitment to free speech. The UK, traditionally a bastion of this fundamental right, seems to waver in the face of a complex intersection of art, politics, and identity. The challenges faced by the artist, the reactions of the public, and the broader societal implications reveal a disconcerting erosion of the principles that have long defined British democracy.

 

These shortcomings underline the urgent need for initiatives fostering understanding and appreciation of contemporary art and the principles of free speech. Public education, art criticism, and open dialogues can create a more informed environment for artists, promoting a richer, more inclusive artistic discourse, and fortifying the UK's commitment to freedom of expression.

​

​

"砖巷涂鸦事件：对海外华人艺术家的猎巫行为及英国在维护言论自由方面的危机"

Canvassius Freeborn

引言

伦敦布里克巷充满活力的艺术氛围最近成为一个复杂争议的中心，从而深刻展示了我们超连接世界中政治艺术面临的挑战。一群艺术家，其中包括中国艺术家逸雀（Yique），在一堵公共墙上涂鸦了一句中国政府的标语，宣扬国家的“社会主义核心价值观”。这件作品本意是对不同环境和态度的一种反映，但很快演变成了政治异见的写照。然而，对这幅艺术作品的在线反应却采取了令人不安的方向，艺术家们成为了个人攻击、威胁和侵犯隐私的目标。

令人不安的线上攻击事件

针对艺术家的冒犯言辞和威胁呈现出一幅令人震惊的图景，显示了线上攻击的严重程度。例如，像“我能捐款给香港团队（想买你的头骨的那个）”和“我出一万，快速dm我”的评论不仅是残酷的讥讽，而且是近乎犯罪的威胁，在任何文明社会中都是完全不可接受的。不幸的是，类似的恐吓和威胁在社交媒体平台上非常普遍，包括Twitter、Reddit和Instagram。这只是线上攻击和暴力普遍问题的冰山一角，引发了有关这些平台在调节和预防此类行为方面角色和责任的紧急问题。

更令人不安的是，这些威胁不是孤立的，似乎是更大、更有凝聚力的努力的一部分，旨在恐吓和骚扰艺术家及其团队，甚至扩展到他们的家人。这些事件不仅仅是对艺术作品的批评或不同意，而是个人攻击和威胁的范畴，展示了在线讨论的更黑暗一面。

这种令人不安的反应揭示了一个悖论。尽管批评者与艺术家可能分享批评中国政府政策的相同意图，但他们错误地将攻击矛头对准了艺术家。这种错误的批评远离了合理和尊重的对话，具有深远的影响。它不仅突显了数字对话的更黑暗的一面，还可能在艺术家中制造出冷峻效应，尤其是海外的中国艺术家，他们可能会担心为他们的政治题材作品遭到类似的抨击，即使他们的意图是以讽刺的方式表达批评。

值得注意的是，罗兰·巴特（Roland Barthes）的“作者之死”概念可以进一步阐明这种悖论。根据巴特的观点，作品的解释应与作者的意图或背景分离。因此，无论艺术家是否打算支持或批评中国共产党，作品本身，从观众的角度来看，都带有讽刺效果。

这种攻击的严重性，正如针对艺术家发起的冒犯甚至威胁性言辞所证明的那样，强调了对围绕艺术自由和表达的氛围进行严肃审查的必要性。它呼吁对艺术进行更为细致的理解，认识到作品本身与作者意图之间的区别，正如巴特提出的那样。

英国的艺术自由与表达

在英国，言论自由和艺术表达受到高度重视，并在1998年人权法案第10条中得以法律保护，其中规定：“每个人都有表达自由的权利。这个权利包括无受到公共当局干预的干扰以及不受地域限制的持有意见、接受和传播信息和思想的自由。”尽管该条款允许根据法律规定的某些限制，并且这些限制在民主社会中是必要的，但它从根本上确保艺术家可以自由表达各种观点并批评社会的各个方面，包括政治。这种艺术自由有助于开放讨论，挑战假设，并促进共情和理解，这些都是健康民主社会的重要组成部分。

艺术自由是民主社会的基石。它包含了艺术家自由表达自己的权利，无需担心审查或惩罚。这种自由对于创作具有政治色彩的艺术至关重要，这种艺术通常在挑战主流叙事、引发讨论和促进社会变革方面起着关键作用。

在这种情况下，我们必须认识到，即使一件作品包含了来自中国共产党的信息，艺术家也有权在其创造性和政治评论的一部分来表达这一点。著名的例子，如艾未未的《葵花籽》，批判了中国社会中的大规模生产和一致性，以及巴丢草的政治漫画，通常挑战中国政府政策，强调了政治评论中艺术自由的重要性。布里克巷艺术品周围的争议使这些自由的价值和保护它们的必要性得到了清晰的关注。它强调了保持一个艺术家可以表达不同观点的空间的重要性，即使这些观点可能引发不同意见或争议。

然而，尽管这些自由受到珍视，但它们不应被用来为个人的攻击或骚扰行为辩护，也不应通过恐惧和恐吓来扼杀创造性的自由。针对布里克巷事件中涉及的艺术家发表的冒犯性和威胁性言辞跨越了这条界限，代表了对艺术家权利的明显侵犯。它们是一个鲜明的提醒，需要在言论自由原则与保护个人免受伤害之间取得平衡。

政治性艺术，本质上可以引发不同社会群体的强烈反应，从而产生活力十足、有意义的讨论，促进对复杂问题的更深入理解。然而，这些反应也可能导致负面结果，正如布里克巷事件所示，艺术家因其作品而面临个人攻击和威胁。

在理想情况下，有争议的艺术会引发细致和尊重的辩论，不同意见的焦点将集中在艺术本身，而不是对艺术家的个人攻击上。这样的辩论将会审查作品的美学、象征、意图和社会背景，促进丰富我们对艺术和它探讨的问题的理解的智力讨论。然而，事实却往往与这个理想相去甚远，正如布里克巷事件所证明的那样。与建设性的对话不同，有争议的艺术可能引发情绪化的反应，这些反应可能掩盖了深思熟虑的参与。个人偏见、政治倾向或先入之见可能推动这些反应，导致攻击艺术家本人，而不是对作品的深思熟虑的审查。从艺术批评转向个人攻击不仅扼杀了有意义的讨论，还创造了一种敌对的环境，可能阻止艺术家冒险或探索具有挑战性的主题。布里克巷事件是对有争议艺术需要更加平衡和尊重的方法的一个显著提醒，这种方法应该尊重作品和所激发的辩论的复杂性。

艺术家所面临的回击突显了数字时代艺术自由的一个关键挑战：在线平台如何被用来放大负面反应，将其转化为有害的个人攻击。如果不加以制约，这种趋势有可能破坏艺术自由，产生一种寒意效应，可能会阻止艺术家涉足政治敏感话题。

在英国等民主社会，言论自由和艺术表达受到法律保护，重要的是确保这些自由不会被在线攻击所破坏。正如布里克巷事件所示，迫切需要培养一种尊重这些自由的数字文化，同时抑制有害行为。

在平衡这些考虑因素时，重要的是记住政治性艺术的价值以及其在促进社会批评和政治进步方面的作用。尽管有争议，这种艺术可以成为挑战假设、引发讨论和促进理解的有力工具。它的重要性强调了保护艺术自由的必要性，确保艺术家可以继续表达他们的观点，而不必担心个人攻击或威胁。

僵化的危险：理解艺术表达的流动性

布里克巷事件深刻反映了艺术被感知、解释和批判的多种方式。在本质上，这场争议揭示了某些观察者中一种不愿立即理解或不符合他们对艺术“应该”是什么的预先设想的倾向，这不仅仅是疏忽，而是对艺术家和更广泛的艺术社群的重大损害。通过这样做，这些个人剥夺了与艺术更深层、更有意义的层次进行互动的机会。他们错过了细微差别、潜在信息、社会政治评论以及常常嵌入当代艺术形式中的更广泛叙述。

这种狭隘的观点让人联想起对艺术解释的专制主义方法，在这种方法中只允许一个“正确”的观点或解释，所有其他观点都被非法化或直接驳斥。这不仅仅是审美偏好的问题；它变成了对艺术本质的限制，它有能力挑战、激发、启发和违反分类。

此外，艺术本质上是进化的。它反映了其时代的精神，捕捉了诞生社会的价值观、困境和愿望。将其限制在刚性界限内意味着扼杀其潜力，使寻求通过创作表达、批判和评论周围世界的人的声音消失。

看到这种对艺术解释的无知和专制主义是令人沮丧的。然而，它也强调了艺术教育、开放对话和培养欣赏文化的重要性，这种文化超越表面，深入探究艺术表达的更深层次。只有这样，我们才能真正欣赏当代艺术的多面性、复杂性和美丽。

历史的回响：当代艺术中的迫害和巫狩？

历史上有许多例子，艺术家作为社会批判和变革的先锋因其创作而受到迫害。他们的艺术创作意图激发思考，却成为束缚他们的锁链，使他们容易被误解，随后遭受巫狩。当代数字时代，以其病毒性和回音室，加剧了这种现象，往往将微妙的艺术表达转化为可燃的分裂点。

一个令人寒心的历史参照是1937年纳粹政权在慕尼黑组织的“退化艺术展览”。这个事件旨在嘲笑和边缘化现代主义、抽象和前卫艺术，导致了成千上万件艺术品的没收和销毁。艺术家在这次展览之后发现自己被边缘化，从教学职位中解雇，并且一些人甚至面临逮捕。同样，在毛泽东1966年至1976年的中国文化大革命期间，受西方风格影响的艺术家或被认为不遵循共产主义意识形态的艺术家，遭到公开羞辱、迫害或被送到再教育营。由于目标是清除资本主义和传统中国文化元素，这场运动导致了无数历史文物、书籍和艺术品的破坏。

布里克巷事件象征着这种危险。Yique的涂鸦，对中国的“社会主义核心价值观”进行了讽刺，不仅仅满足于被限制在涂鸦的砖头画布内。相反，它溢出来，引发了激烈的辩论、热烈的支持，不幸的是，也引发了由匿名在线暴民引发的恶意迫害。这种反应，虽然表明了艺术持久的激发力，但也强调了艺术家往往发现自己在其中航行的危险地带，尤其是在我们的超联网世界中。

艺术的误解，特别是当与强烈的政治情绪相结合时，可能导致快速而严重的后果。对艺术家来说，尤其是那些处理有争议问题的艺术家，个人成本可能是惊人的。他们发现自己处于风暴的中心，这个风暴充满了错误的愤怒，往往成为个人诽谤、在线骚扰甚至对他们生命安全的威胁的受害者。

这是一个令人深思的悖论。艺术家的天性是挑战传统，质疑社会规范，并引发对话。然而，在快速的数字反应往往超过反思性的回应的时代，他们的艺术可能被剥夺了其微妙性，简化为二元对立，并被用来对抗他们自己。随之而来的巫狩，受到错误解读的驱动，并由在线暴民放大，可能是无情且无情的。而对于社会，这可能会导致有意义的辩论的缺乏，将政治性艺术变成了战场，而不是思想交流的场所。

​

​

...........

​

此外，该事件还暴露了英国在言论自由承诺方面的危机。英国传统上是这一基本权利的堡垒，在艺术、政治和身份的复杂交汇面前似乎动摇不定。艺术家所面临的挑战，公众的反应以及更广泛的社会影响揭示了长期定义英国民主的原则正在受到令人不安的侵蚀。

这些缺陷凸显了急需的举措，以促进对当代艺术和言论自由原则的理解和欣赏。公共教育、艺术批评和开放对话可以为艺术家创造一个更加知情的环境，促进更丰富、更包容的艺术话语，并加强英国对言论自由的承诺。

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Dear Yique,

 

I trust this email finds you in good spirits, despite the tempestuous circumstances that surround you. Writing under my pseudonym, Canvassius Freeborn, I am compelled to respond to your earnest communication.

The predicament you face, both artistically and personally, has indeed resonated with me. It is a situation most grave, one that transcends the art itself and delves into the very essence of freedom and expression.

Allow me to outline my thoughts:

1. Engaging the Media: Our present discourse and the complexities it unveils must transcend the bounds of private correspondence and reach a broader audience. Therefore, as an open letter, I propose you endeavor to have both the original letter and the subsequent article titled "The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech" sent on Wednesday published through esteemed professional media outlets, initially, including but not limited to The Guardian, BBC, Bloomberg, CNN, and The New York Times. Presenting these materials in both English and an accurate Chinese translation will illuminate the intricate facets of this issue, casting a spotlight on the paramount importance of free artistic creation. This effort is not merely a response to a singular event, it is a manifestation of our unyielding commitment to the fundamental values that define our society.

 

2. A Considered Perspective: I believe that discerning readers, citizens with a conscience, those well-versed in the arts, and political and moral philosophers will appreciate the complexity of this issue upon reflection. This incident transcends mere graffiti, it serves as a mirror reflecting our societal stance on freedom of speech, the impact of cyber hostility, and the need for respectful disagreement.

 

3. The Essence of Art: Your artwork, Yique, has stirred more than mere controversy, it has ignited a dialogue and prompted reflection. This is, at its core, the very purpose of art—to provoke thought, inspire discourse, and challenge prevailing norms. It acts as a catalyst, encouraging us to question our assumptions and engage with complex ideas, sometimes even forcing us to confront uncomfortable truths. By transcending the superficial and delving into the substantive, your artistic expression has not merely echoed a sentiment but sparked a conversation that resonates far beyond the confines of a gallery wall. Remarkably, it may even attract citizens who have never cared about art, compelling them to reflect on the intricate relationship between art and real life, and perhaps inspiring a newfound appreciation for the transformative power of creative expression.

 

In the meantime, Yique, do keep your chin up and remain resilient. The challenge before you is not merely a personal ordeal but a complex interplay of artistic expression, political critique, and societal reflection. It reaches into the very core of what art represents and how it resonates within the fabric of our culture. This is no small feat, and the path ahead may be fraught with uncertainty and opposition. Yet, it is a challenge that merits our full attention and effort, for it speaks to the broader questions of artistic freedom, intellectual integrity, and the power of art to inspire change. Your voice, your vision, your art—they matter, and they have set in motion a conversation that extends far beyond the confines of this moment. Stand firm, for your contribution to this dialogue is both valuable and vital.

 

Yours sincerely,

Canvassius Freeborn

​

​

​

​

​

​

亲爱的一鹊，

 

我诚挚地希望这封邮件能在你身处风雨飘摇的环境中找到你，希望你依然保持良好的精神状态。我以笔名Canvassius Freeborn的身份，不禁要回应你真诚的联络。

你所面临的困境，无论从艺术还是个人的角度来看，都确实引起了我的共鸣。这是一个严峻的局面，超越了艺术本身，深入到自由和表达的本质层面。

请允许我概述我的想法：

• 吸引媒体关注：我们当前的对话以及它所揭示的复杂性必须超越私人通信的界限，传达给更广泛的受众。因此，作为一封公开信，我建议你努力使原信和随后的文章题为“Brick Lane涂鸦事件：针对海外华人艺术家的巫猎和英国在维护言论自由方面潜在的危机”在周三通过备受尊敬的专业媒体发布，起初包括但不限于The Guardian、BBC、Bloomberg、CNN和The New York Times等。以英文和准确的中文翻译呈现这些材料，将阐明这个问题的复杂方面，将聚焦于自由艺术创作的极端重要性。这个努力不仅仅是对一个特定事件的回应，更是对我们社会基本价值观的不懈承诺的体现。

• 深思熟虑的观点：我相信，有眼光的读者、有良知的公民、精通艺术的人以及政治和道德哲学家在反思之后会欣赏到这个问题的复杂性。这个事件超越了简单的涂鸦，它是一面镜子，反映了我们社会对言论自由的立场，网络敌意的影响以及对尊重性异议的需求。

• 艺术的本质：一鹊，你的艺术作品不仅仅引发了争议，更是引发了对话和反思。这在本质上就是艺术的目的——引发思考，激发对话，挑战现有的规范。它充当了一个催化剂，鼓励我们质疑我们的假设，与复杂的观念互动，有时甚至迫使我们面对不舒服的真相。通过超越表面，深入实质，你的艺术表达不仅仅是回应了一种情感，更是引发了一场超越画廊墙壁范围的对话。令人惊讶的是，它甚至可能吸引从未关心过艺术的市民，促使他们反思艺术与现实生活之间错综复杂的关系，并可能激发对创造性表达的变革力量的新发现欣赏。

与此同时，一鹊，请保持乐观并保持坚韧。你面前的挑战不仅仅是个人的磨练，更是艺术表达、政治批评和社会反思的复杂相互作用。它深入到艺术的本质代表什么，以及它如何在我们文化的结构中产生共鸣。这绝不是一项小事，前路可能充满了不确定性和反对声音。然而，这是一项值得我们充分关注和努力的挑战，因为它涉及更广泛的艺术自由、知识诚信以及艺术激发变革力量的问题。你的声音，你的视野，你的艺术——它们都是重要的，也是至关重要的。你为这场对话做出的贡献既有价值又至关重要。

​

 

​

​