SPRING WAS REBELLIOUS, BUT IT’S ALL OVER NOW – PUBLIC ART, POLITICS AND THE LAW IN POST-APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA – PART ONE

Abstract

Politics, art and the law make uncomfortable bedfellows. The commissioning of public art by public bodies, in particular, often gives rise to bitter controversy. As a recent ongoing public spat over the suitability of a sculpture of three large elephants in the Durban area attests, South Africa is not immune from such controversy. Using the facts of this particular case as a lens, this article seeks to address the following central question: In the context of post-apartheid South Africa, when public works of art are commissioned by public bodies, to what extent do state officials have the right to involve themselves and/or interfere in the process? After outlining salient details of the Durban elephant sculpture case, part one of this article seeks to situate the central issues raised in their historical and ideological context. It then proceeds to address the issue of the “proper” relationship to be maintained between state officials
and public art within a constitutional democracy such as South Africa. A strong case is made that the values of tolerance, openness and diversity should be central in setting the broad parameters of the present debate on this issue. In particular, it is argued that the South African state should adopt a “hands-off” and “arms-length” approach when it comes to the funding and commissioning of public art. Part one of this article concludes with a discussion on the legitimate limits to free artistic expression.