 The outrage which cartoons of the Prophet
Muhammad have provoked among Muslims has prompted much self-righteous
blather about the sanctity of free speech. Yet Muslims are not the only
ones who seem to find blasphemy beyond the pale, and who believe that
religion should take precedence over liberty. Here in the UK, Christians
retain the protection of the law of 'blasphemous libel', a common law
offence which forbids the publication of 'contemptuous, reviling,
scurrilous or ludicrous matter relating to God'. Although archaic, this
law provides a striking counterpoint to the claim that freedom of
expression is an integral part of the British way of life.
Take the case of
Visions of Ecstasy, an innocuous (if rather
silly) short film depicting 'the ecstatic and erotic visions of St
Teresa of Avila' which was banned in the UK in 1989. In the film, St
Teresa is first seduced by her own sexual psyche (played, conveniently,
by a photegenic 'babe'), and then mounts and caresses the crucified body
of Christ. Technical shortcomings notwithstanding (hands which seem to
move freely despite apparently being nailed down) the film raised a
problem for the BBFC, which is forbidden from classifying material which
may infringe the laws of the land.
Despite support from the likes of Derek Jarman, the BBFC concluded that,
if prosecuted, a 'reasonable jury' was likely to convict Visions of
Ecstasy as blasphemous. Not to be defeated, director Nigel Wingrove (who
has since helmed the cult nuns-on-heat romp Sacred Flesh)
took his case to
the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the very existence
of a blasphemy law contravened the freedoms of expression enshrined in
the European Convention of Human Rights. In a mealy-mouthed ruling, the
Court agreed that Freedom of expression constitutes one of the
essential foundations of a democratic society, but with the caveat
that freedom carries with it duties and responsibilities
including a duty to avoid as far as possible an expression that is,
in regard to objects of veneration [i.e. religion], gratuitously
offensive to others and profanatory. Which effectively meant that
Wingrove was allowed his freedom of expression unless such freedom
offended his Christian peers. In which case, he wasn't...
Visions of Ecstasy remains the only film to be banned in the UK
solely on grounds of blasphemy. Yet the issues which the law raises
remain a very real concern. Having successfully transformed itself from
an autocratic censorship body into one of the most accountable
regulators in the world, the BBFC now rightly prides itself on
maintaining a fine balance between the liberal principles of its own
classification guidelines and the rigid inflexibilities of certain
aspects of the law. In the case of Martin Scorsese's The Last
Temptation of Christ (1988), for example, pre-release protests from
Christians alleging blasphemy resulted in the board screening the film
to 28 representatives of the UK's major churches, who concluded that it
'was not blasphemous in the legal sense, although it may have the
capacity to offend some Christian viewers'. An 18 certificate was duly
awarded.
Despite the clean bill of health, some local councils went ahead and
banned The Last Temptation of Christ anyway. The furore followed
the movie onto TV, where its transmission provoked a record number of
complaints. Similar protests attended the classification of Dogma
(1999), a religious satire staring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck as fallen
angels, which provoked a deluge of pre-printed mail shots from sections
of the Catholic church demanding that the BBFC ban the movie. The board
refused, a decision in which it was supported by the office of the
Archbishop of Westminster which went on the record to say that Dogma
was not blasphemous. Still the protests continued.
Less well-rehearsed are the rare cases of cult and 'special interest'
movies which have been cut in order to comply with our blasphemy laws.
Trash maestro John Waters may have entered the mainstream with
multiplex-friendly fare such as Hairspray, Cry Baby and Serial Mom, but
his early underground film Multiple Maniacs (1970) is still
considered legally unpassable in its complete form thanks to a scene in
which Divine makes nefarious use of a rosary intercut with the Stations
of the Cross. More bizarre still is the case of a hardcore sex video
which was submitted to the board last year, featuring sacrilegious
dildos being placed where the sun doesn't shine by 'women role playing
as nuns'. The video, which was duly cut 'in accordance with the
Blasphemy Act 1698', rejoices under the charming title Belladonna: My
Ass is Haunted. And no, that's not 'Ass' in the biblical sense of
the word.
While there's no doubt that such material is potentially extremely
offensive (to me, at least), should we really retain a law which
privileges the sensitivities of Christians over those of others? The
Last Temptation of Christ may have been reclassified in 2000 to a
more lenient 15 certificate, but Visions of Ecstasy remains
banned in the UK to this day, a situation which the BBFC cannot rectify
as long as the offence of blasphemy remains on the statute books. In the
wake of the recent rebellion regarding proposed legislation on religious
hatred, which, it was claimed, threatened artistic and democratic
freedoms, has the time not arrived to repeal Britain's outdated
blasphemy law? Only then will we have an even playing field in which
freedom of speech is genuinely sacrosanct, and all religions (and their
critics) are granted the same level of protection in the UK.
|
