A comic book mystery

Editorial

Such a mystery! Nobody seems to know where an offensive little comic book came from – or, if they know, they're not telling. The grunt gallery, an East Vancouver nonprofit art gallery, is hosting an exhibit of drawings by the local artist Carel Moiseiwitsch. (That was a story in itself.)

Accompanying the exhibit is a cynical little photocopied cartoon chapbook pretending to be a "Travel Guide to Occupied Palestine."

Jews in the comic are depicted with stereotypical features, characteristic of anti-Semitic propaganda from the Medieval period to the 20th century. Female Israeli border guards are depicted as sex-starved; Israel Defence Forces soldiers as casually homicidal; and Israel as the apparent sole perpetrator of violence in the conflict.

The gallery director says the comic book showed up at the same time as the exhibit and that she knows nothing about it. The artist refused to tell the Bulletin who created it or why it is included with her exhibit. Nobody, it seems, wants to take credit for it or explain its genesis, but there it is: a couple of photocopied pages of hateful, if amateurish, imagery, yours for a suggested donation of $5.

Which raises the question: In an art gallery funded by all three levels of government, in a city known worldwide for diversity and harmonious multiculturalism, shouldn't someone at least take responsibility for the presence of this comic book?

The gallery administrator said she chose not to discuss the issue with the Bulletin because to comment on material that is part of an exhibit could harm the relationship between artist and gallery. Possibly so. But there is another responsibility a publicly funded gallery has as well: to maintain a degree of sensitivity to the public good. Then there is another, very serious responsibility: federal law.

This booklet may be illegal under hate crimes legislation. But, that is a matter for the police and the Crown, who may, in time, consider this very issue.

In addition, the booklet was not even created by the artist having the exhibit and was not mentioned in the planning of the exhibit. It's not hanging on a wall and it's not sitting on a pedestal as though it were installation art. For all intents and purposes, it's not even part of the exhibit at all; it's simply a means for Palestinian supporters to make some money by insulting an ethnic group – Jews. For the gallery administrator to say she might alienate the artist by disallowing such material is spurious and spineless.

Just as this newspaper is responsible, ultimately, for everything included in its pages, an art gallery is equally responsible – morally, but also legally – for the material hanging on its walls and for sale in its premises.

^TOP