| |
SINGAPORE : The Censorship Review Committee's latest report has sparked a mixed response within the arts community.
While some agreed with the need for a more transparent regulatory process, others said the recommendations offered nothing new.
Some were also sceptical of having a term licensing system.
The staging of the 2006 play "Fundamentally Happy" was preceded by a series of letters between the theatre company The Necessary Stage and the Arts Consultative Panel.
In the end, the company did not succeed in lowering the play's R18 rating, as it was about paedophilia.
But it said this process allows it to understand where the boundaries are so that it can tweak its work while not diluting its message.
With term licensing, where blanket approval is given for a number of years, there is a lot more uncertainty.
Alvin Tan, The Necessary Stage's artistic director, said: "We are walking on a minefield and waiting for the OB markers to explode in your face."
He added that the fear of losing the privileges of term licensing might lead some artists to self-censor.
Mr Tan also said: "With the present system, at least there are some responses from MDA (Media Development Authority) and we go to the table and negotiate. In fact, it gives us the opportunity to nuance the work, but not all artists and not all theatre companies would respond the same way."
In its report, the Censorship Review Committee had recommended that term licensing, which it saw as a way of giving the arts community more autonomy, be "implemented without further delay".
The idea itself had been briefly implemented in 2003, after the last committee's review, but did not take off as arts groups continued to submit their scripts to the MDA.
One observer said that term licensing is premature. For it to work, open and honest dialogue between the arts community, the government and the public, must first be the norm.
Audrey Wong, a Nominated MP, who is also the former co-artistic director of The Substation, said: "The thing is, how are those consultations going to take place, how are they managed? If views are expressed to MDA that the authorities may not be comfortable with, what happens then?"
Terence Chong, a sociologist at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and observer of the arts scene, added another caveat. He said arts groups must be assured they will not be financially penalised for pushing artistic boundaries.
Both artists and the Censorship Review Committee agree that it is time for the public to be given more responsibility. They should be given enough information on what the show is about, and left to decide if they want to watch it. It is one step towards building a more mature arts community, but it is also a recognition that technology has made it impossible for the government to control all content.
The arts community generally welcomed the call for a more transparent process.
Mr Tan agrees that where decisions were made by agencies other than the regulator, they should be publicly identified.
He said: "Can we have access and dialogue with them directly? It would be good that artists have direct access to people who hold these concerns and who have that anxiety."
But others in the arts community worry that when it comes to engaging the public and artists, the views of the minority will be ignored.
They were also disappointed that the report stayed silent on whether shows rated R21 may be passed uncut, so long as warnings are displayed clearly. - CNA/ms
|
