The Manchester Gallery removed a picture of naked nymphs to “provoke a discussion”

MANCHESTER. The Manchester Art Gallery removed the work of Waterhouse from the exhibition and asked the audience to express their opinion.

The picture depicts naked nymphs luring a handsome young man into a death trap. But is it not too far gone erotic fantasy representative of the Victorian era? Is it too inappropriate and even offensive to the modern viewer, especially if we take into account the mood of society?

It was with this question that the Manchester Art Gallery turned to visitors, removing one of the most famous paintings written by the Pre-Raphaelite artist John William Waterhouse, “Gilas and Nymphs” from the audience. It is also planned to withdraw artwork from the museum store.

" title="Джон Уильям Уотерхаус – Гилас и нимфы ">

The canvas was removed, and instead a notice was hung in which visitors are asked to leave comments on how they “interpret the exhibits of the gallery’s collection”. People responded and left notes, attaching them to the wall next to the notification.

“A good topic for discussion, but please return it to its place. And analyze the context of the picture. ”

- “Do not argue from the point of view of the binary gender system!?! Indeed. Praise women. ”

“Why not remove the Odyssey and the Sirens from Gallery No. 6?” The same concept of a fatal woman? Wasn’t it hard to carry? ”

Claire Gunnaway, curator of the gallery, who heads the department of contemporary art, explained that this was done in order to provoke discussion, rather than impose censorship. “It’s not about rejecting any work of art,” she says.

The painting is usually located in the hall, which is called "In the pursuit of beauty." Here are the paintings of the late XIX century, in abundance showing female flesh.

Gannaway believes that the name of the hall is far from the most successful, since in these paintings a woman is presented as a passive decorative art form or as a fatal woman. In addition, male artists portrayed women.

“I personally feel embarrassed that we have not done this before. We solved some other issues… no one paid attention to this exhibition space and did not think in the right direction. Now, after a long period of inaction, we want to do at least something. ”

Gannaway says that the polemic around #MeToo led them to such a decision. (A popular hashtag that instantly spread on social networks in October 2017, highlighting the condemnation of sexual violence and harassment, spread as a result of the scandal and accusations of film producer Harvey Weinstein).

Removing a picture from the hall is already an artistic act worthy of representation at the exhibition, which was done at the recent solo exhibition of Sonya Boyce.

Among those present at the shooting of the visitors was the artist Michael Brown. He is concerned that the past is being crossed out. “I am opposed to replacing some works of art with others, and I don’t like it when they say to me:“ This is wrong, but it’s right. ” Using their position, they veto the works of art in the public collection. Who knows how many days, weeks, months the canvas will be absent? If no one protests, the picture may not return to its place. ”

Brown expressed concern that historical paintings are thrown away in order to promote the work of contemporary artists. Other gallery visitors are also worried; opinions are mottled. Some claim that a precedent is being created. Others support the gallery, considering it "politically correct."

“I know that there are other paintings in the basement that, for the same reasons, are also likely to be considered offensive, and they are not destined to see the light of day.”

“We think that she will return, and we dare to hope that they will represent her in a completely different context. We have in mind not only one picture, but the whole context of the gallery. ”

Waterhouse’s Lady of the Shallot is among the best-selling postcards in the Tate Gallery in London, but some of the artist’s work is embarrassing. He is even accused of almost pornography. Waldemar Januszczak, an art critic, once wrote about a Waterhouse painting about the death of St. Eulalia (she was 12 years old): “I was confused and did not know what to do: laugh, cry or call the police.”

Natalya Marachkovskaya