Art removed from Faculty Club
Caterer exploiting the Faculty Club at the 17th floor of H-building, expressed objections against seven paintings from artist Manuel Kneepkens being exposed there. The paintings are considered inappropriate. Students give their view.
Jenni Guilleaume (from Germany) second year IBA
“The first painting is not very suitable to hang in a public place. It is controversial, but has a clear religious connection at the same time, which might make it a risky choice to hang in an area accessible to everybody.
The second painting has no clear connection to religion. Obviously, it depicts a naked person, but I wouldn’t consider it offensive.”
Nathan Mesnildrey (from France) second year IBA
“I can imagine people consider the painting blasphemous. It has a clear religious sign. In France, this would not be allowed in a public place, because of French secularism – which prohibits religious signs to appear in public places. Personally, I’m not religious, so I don’t find it offensive, but for a restaurant it’s maybe too much.
I don’t have anything really against the second painting. Maybe the fact that the wrists and ankles of the person seem to be strapped might create the impression of a prisoner or even sex slave, but I’m not sure whether that’s the case.”
Aditya Rachmat (from Indonesia) master Commercial Law
“I’m muslim, so to me the first painting is not offensive. But if a person were Christian, I could imagine it being offensive to him or her. On the other hand, I don’t see porn or inappropriateness in the picture. It’s art. Moreover, it’s a professional painter – which makes the painter a bit more knowledgeable than the public on what is appropriate and what isn’t.
In Indonesia – where I’m originally from – these two paintings would definitely be considered inappropriate for the nakedness. That’s why I love Europe on this issue: people are free to express themselves and their opinions.”
|Painting 1||Painting 2|