Dear Members of the PEN SA Board
30 May 2019
A year ago, after equivocating on the suppression at UCT of artwork "of the highest political and moral integrity" (Daniel Herwitz) by "artists of impeccable political standing" (Imraan Coovadia), PEN SA promised:
- [To] continue to monitor the processes concerning artworks at UCT closely,
- with special attention given to how UCT fulfills its own Task Team’s recommendations that it develops a curatorial policy as a means to make sure any so-called ‘contested’ artworks (whether previously on display, previously in storage, currently on display or currently in storage) may be displayed on their campuses, as well as kept safe.
- Should it come to pass that these recommendations and processes are not followed or sufficiently resolved, the Board will act further.
In March of this year, after UCT's former University Librarian, Gwenda Thomas, told an international conference that "the previous Vice-Chancellor [Max Price] issued a written instruction to the University Librarian to perform an act of censorship, in the name of cultural transformation, to arrange for the coverings to be placed back on the Sarah Baartman sculpture”, your Centre Coordinator said you wanted to interview Ms Thomas for your website. No interview appeared.
This month, after receiving a report from the UCT Works of Art Committee (WOAC) listing its activities since mid-2017, your Communications Director said that an article about it would be featured in your 22 May newsletter. It was not.
Earlier this this year, Tim Quinlan asked of UCT, "Complexity is very difficult for UCT’s scholars? Isn’t it just grist for the mill?”. I ask if nuance and complexity are too difficult for an organization of writers and intellectuals; are they not your stock-in-trade?
In the face of all evidence, is it your conclusion that censorship did not occur at UCT, or is it that censorship was justified in this case? Either way, you are surely able to articulate your position.
And if institutional or personal relationships between yourselves and the University of Cape Town presented conflicts of interest that paralyzed your decision-making, you should say so.
The PEN Charter not only holds that "In all circumstances, and particularly in time of war, works of art, the patrimony of humanity at large, should be left untouched by national or political passion", but also requires that "members pledge themselves to oppose any form of suppression of freedom of expression in the country and community to which they belong".
Can you account for PEN SA’s failure to uphold both its own institutional mandate and its recent local commitments?
Sincerely,
William Daniels
