Censorship battle

Censorship or debate starter? Why removing Waterhouse’s Nymphs from a UK gallery was a bad idea

The decision to remove a 19th-century painting because of its portrayal of naked women was a heavy-handed way of making a valid point.

Manchester Art Gallery’s decision to temporarily remove John William Waterhouse’s 1896 work, Hylas and the Nymphs, has undeniably succeeded in its stated aim to “prompt conversation about how we display and interpret artwork”.

The painting, which usually hangs in a gallery full of 19th-century works entitled In Pursuit of Beauty, has been temporarily removed, according to the gallery’s curator of contemporary art, Clare Gannaway. The painting was replaced by a notice telling visitors that the decision to take down the painting is itself an artistic act which will feature in a solo show by the artist Sonia Boyce which opens in March. Post-it notes were provided for people to leave their reactions.

Given the recent deplorable revelations that have fuelled the #MeToo movement, this action is very timely. But it’s debatable whether such a curatorial exercise is the most effective way of producing meaningful discussion. How does it affect the way we evaluate the past?

Museums are important for establishing a society’s identity and values. Understanding the way art was collected and displayed in the past – and how public audiences interacted with it – offers invaluable insights into the development of culture. It also helps us to see how our values have changed over time.

The fact that the Manchester Corporation bought Hylas and the Nymphs in the very year it was painted reveals Waterhouse’s high reputation at the time and also the acceptability of the subject in the past. It surely fulfilled the gallery’s civic mission of encouraging culture and learning.

The gallery invites us now to “challenge this Victorian fantasy” of the femmes fatales, but we need to avoid stereotyping. Yes, it was produced in the Victorian age, but it wasn’t just a titillating indulgence for “gentlemen”.

Like the Manchester Art Gallery, Victorian galleries also wanted to provoke their audiences, which included both men and women. In their desire to start conversations, the Victorians and the Manchester Art Gallery’s current curators thus share more than they perhaps realise.

Alison Smith’s book The Victorian Nude: Sexuality, Morality and Art and the 2001 Tate Britain exhibition Exposed: The Victorian Nude, have shown that the nude was also contentious in the Victorian period. The Victorian critic Robert Buchanan attacked Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s “fleshly” art forms (poetic and painterly), while the Royal Academician John Calcott Horsley famously wrote to The Times in 1885, masquerading as “The British Matron”, to oppose nakedness in contemporary artworks.

Gender and power

Writers since the 1960s have been raising issues of gender and power in art. Griselda Pollock’s essay Beholding Art History: Vision, Place and Power (1995) argued that there had been a “dominant masculine Western ideology” in art history that needed to be addressed. Academic research can help reconstruct the art galleries of the past – and bring them back to life in journal articles and books – but the modern museum must engage, educate and entertain its public.

Publicly funded art galleries have an indisputable duty to address the urgent needs of their audience, and questions of gender have never been more vital. Removing Hylas arguably does little to further this debate. How can the value of the work be judged in absentia? Postcards of Hylas have also been removed from the shop – if this is part of their intention to provoke debate they ought to have said so.

Ulysses and the Sirens by John Waterhouse (1891). Photo credit: National Gallery of Victoria
Ulysses and the Sirens by John Waterhouse (1891). Photo credit: National Gallery of Victoria

Provoking a reaction

Is Waterhouse’s work a fitting subject for these exclusionary tactics? His Ulysses and the Sirens (1891) shows that he did not always indulge in nude forms. A vase in the British Museum inspired him to present the sirens as birds with the heads of women. Even his nudes were not mere voyeurism, but thoughtful and considered. His St Eulalia (1885) used the nudity of the young female saint to broach questions of Christianity.

Knight Errant by Sir John Everett Millais (1870). The Tate
Knight Errant by Sir John Everett Millais (1870). The Tate

Should perhaps a different work have been chosen by the artist activist, say Millais’ Knight Errant due to its “outdated” ideals of chivalry and the contrast between the fully armoured knight and the naked women he is rescuing? Would a more meaningful conversation have been started by comparing two images of women, or images by male and female artists? Just editing out objects from the public sphere is surely not a desirable function of either curators or contemporary artists.

If the comments on the Manchester Art Gallery webpage and on social media are anything to go by, it has certainly fulfilled their intent to provoke. The removal of Hylas has created a platform for opinions, but it hasn’t actually enabled a conversation.

Thankfully, the temporary absence of Hylas is just that – temporary – and conversations will soon be able to resume in the presence of the work. As one person commented on the art gallery’s website:

I’ve discussed these issues in the past, prompted in part by viewing this particular painting. I’m hoping we’ll get a chance to debate this off-line, at an open event.

The recent removal has had the important effect of revitalising interest in Waterhouse’s work, but we still need to find better ways of getting wider audiences to engage meaningfully with historic artworks that can be related to issues important for us today.

Matthew Potter, Reader in Art and Design History, Northumbria University, Newcastle.

This article first appeared on The Conversation.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Daily survival can be accomplished on a budget

By knowing what you need, when you need it and where to find it.

Creating and managing a fully-functional adult life can get overwhelming. If the planning isn’t intimidating enough, the budgeting is especially stressful with the rising prices of daily essentials. A separate survival fund is not what is required, though. The bulk of survival in the 21st century is based on your product smarts. Knowing what you need when you need it is more than half the battle won.

Needs vary according to different life situations. For instance, in their first tryst with homemaking, young tenants struggle for survival. They need to cultivate a relationship with products they never cared to use at home. Floor cleaners, bathroom cleaners and dish soaps are essential; monitor their usage with discipline. Then there are personal utensils, to be safeguarded with a vengeance. Let’s not forget mosquito, rodent and cockroach repellents to keep hefty, unwanted medical bills away. For those shifting into a hostel for the first time, making an initial inventory covering even the most underrated things (basic kitchen implements, first aid kit, clothes hangers, cloth clips etc.) will help reduce self-made crises.

Glowing new parents, meanwhile, face acute, urgent needs. Drowning in best wishes and cute gifts, they tend to face an immediate drought of baby supplies. Figuring out a steady, reliable supply of diapers and baby shampoos, soaps, powders and creams can take a slight edge off of parenting for exhausted new parents.

Then there are the experts, the long-time homemakers. Though proficient, they can be more efficient with regards to their family’s nutrition needs with some organisation. A well-laid out kitchen command centre will help plan out their shopping and other chores for the coming day, week and month. Weekly meal plans, for example, will not only ensure all family members eat right, but will also cut down on indecision in the supermarket aisle and the subsequent wasteful spending. Jot down fruits and vegetables, dried fruits and nuts and health beverages for growing kids. Snack Stations are a saviour for moms with perpetually hungry li’l ones, keeping your refrigerator strategically stocked with healthy snacks options that can cater to tastes of all family members.

Once the key needs are identified, the remainder of the daily survival battle is fought on supermarket aisles. Collecting deals, tracking sales days and supermarket hopping have been the holy grail of budget shopping. Some supermarkets, though, are more proactive in presenting value for money on items of daily need. The video below captures the experiences of shoppers who have managed savings just by their choice of supermarket.


Big Bazaar offers the easiest route to budget shopping with its lowest price guarantee on 1500+ daily essentials across all its stores. This offer covers all frequently bought items such as ghee, sugar, edible oil, detergent, toilet cleaners, soaps, shampoos, toothpaste, health drinks, tea, biscuits and much, much more. Moreover, the ‘Har Din Lowest Price’ guarantee is not limited to a few sales days and will be applicable all year round. To know more about Har Din Lowest Price at Big Bazaar, click here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Big Bazaar and not by the Scroll editorial team.