I think I've already written about almost every possible cartoon-induced move, but this one is curious and noteworthy because the situation seems like an easy joke.
It is common for those who organise or host exhibitions of cartoons to try to "moderate" or filter what is exhibited in order to be on the safe side. Others go much further and censor some pieces unceremoniously, on this occasion total censorship is applied so as not to upset the local councils or risk offending anyone. They have immolated themselves and cancelled the exhibition"just in case".
As the UK's Daily Mail reports, an exhibition comprising dozens of vignettes from across the political spectrum was to be opened to the public after its private presentation at the TownSq work centre in Kingston Riverside, Kingston-upon-Thames, south-west London.
The exhibition was organised by photographer Paul Mowatt and artist Zoe Dorelli of Whitelight Projects and was described as follows: "It brings together an esteemed collection of renowned cartoonists of all political persuasions who, between them, have worked in every publication worth mentioning. Licence to Offend is a unique opportunity to see the work of these exceptional artists off the page and on the wall".
Participating artists: Christian Adams - Patrick Blower - Chris Cray - J G Fox - Clive Goddard - Nicola Jennings - Stanley McMurtry - Morten Morland - Rob Murray - Ingram Pinn - Jonathan Pugh - Mark Reeve - Martin Rowson - David Simonds - John Springs - Guy Venables
But a day before the public opening, Zoe Dorelli emailed the artists to tell them that"the venue has asked us to remove the exhibition immediately after our private visit".
He added: "They told me they found the play too offensive! Apparently they have to deal with councils all over the country and they can't risk offending anyone or appearing too political.
What does it mean in the minds of the locals to be"too" political? What the fuck did they expect from an exhibition with this title? What do they think political humour and graphic humour in general is?
A spokesperson for TownSq Kingston told the Daily Mail: "While we did not find the exhibition offensive, Kingston Riverside is a workspace, and our policy is to remain politically neutral".
The height of absurdity.
I have not yet been able to find all the cartoons that were going to be part of the exhibition, but in the Daily Mail article, which also includes the reactions of some of the cartoonists, they publish these three samples that not only don't seem a bit scandalous to me, quite the opposite in fact.
In a transgender clinic the receptionist/doctor tells the client: "I must warn you that if you have the operation you will be banned from competing in international women's athletics.
The bird says to his cellmate:"Me? I'm here for some regrettable tweets".
"On a still day you can hear the laughter of Brussels" (I don't know the context of this one, but it seems to me to allude to Brexit).
Humour in trouble, a collection of cases
Cases of cartoonists who have had problems of some importance because of their cartoons or satirical illustrations. There are also some stories of other people who, without being cartoonists, have got into trouble for sharing them.
