Simon Warren send a provocative contribution to my apolitical exhibition "Art of the Hand".

[Maxie Eulig]

[Isabelle Dehennin]

I had already formed an opinion about this before reading the whole discussion, and I would like to add it here.

First of all, I find it upsetting that this has been so distressing for Maxie. As I understood her call, it was quite clearly defined: a documentary art project about local crafts, using the postal system and the postcard format. To me, that clearly makes it a Mail Art call, but it does not make the subject matter unlimited.

Before sending my own contribution, I even asked Maxie whether local table-grape growing could count as a craft, since it is a manual activity rather than an arts-and-crafts practice. She was very open and liberal in her interpretation and gave me complete freedom within that framework. So I do not have the impression that she was imposing narrow restrictions on content. On the contrary, I think the subject of the call was already quite clearly delimited.

Of course, in hindsight, one could say that a standard sentence such as “no jury, no political or offensive content” might have prevented this misunderstanding. But I do not think the absence of such a sentence automatically means that every possible contribution must be considered relevant to the call.

For me, this is not really a hierarchy of values in which the organiser’s freedom has to be weighed against freedom of expression. We are not dealing here with the state, censorship law, public order or morality. In that sense, Mail Art is happily much freer than that. But we are still adults who should be able to talk reasonably to one another about context, intention and boundaries.

Simon’s work may be perfectly valid Mail Art in itself, and his political message may be entirely legitimate. But in my opinion, it does not really coincide with the object of this particular call. There is a difference between censoring a political opinion and deciding whether a contribution actually responds to the subject of a specific exhibition.

The Mail Art tradition of “no jury, no rejection, everything shown” is important, but if interpreted absolutely, it creates a strange imbalance: the sender would effectively have more freedom than the organiser, because any themed call could then be used as a vehicle for any unrelated message. At that point, the idea of a “call” itself begins to lose meaning.

So my position is quite simple: Simon’s piece can be legitimate Mail Art and still not be a fitting response to this particular call. Those two things are not contradictory.

[William M]

yes, zorica is correct in what i was trying to say. i was having trouble reading the words, but it seems to be a criticism of the uk government's support of the genocide going on in gaza.

[Maxie Eulig]

Oh, this is bigger than I expected. I’m an amateur, not a curator, so there are many blind spots. Dear Simon, in another context I would have reacted very differently to your work. I agree with you on the main point anyway. Thank you very much for all the food for thought (there’s a lot of it!). Obviously, I need to rethink not whether, but how I should show your contribution. And thank you all also for the collective correction. I didn’t mean to break any conventions or upset anyone.

[Kiki]

OK, so, now I can read what it is written in this "Mail Art" by Simon, in English. I know it is very expensive as for postage for mails from UK to the World. And it is NOT that he sent it annonymously. So, in that sense, I guess it was in a way serious, in his own way. But at the same time, it is NOT that I do not understand why Maxie with her father thought it was provocative. I am fairly new to Mail Art myself, so this matter, as a whole, made me think quite a lot... it is hard for me to say what I think all in all, but it is something like Yes and No, both, at the moment.....

[Kiki]

@ MH //ANTIPODE  -

Hand crafted... Thank you for letting me know ! 

[MH//ANTIPODE]

There are plenty of Mail Art calls that explicitly ask for kid friendly or non political works, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It just seems much better to make those boundaries clear in the call beforehand. My impression is that the practical limits of this particular call only became apparent once an example of that kind arrived.

Warren's Mail Art is also quite often deliberately provocative. That's very much a speciality of his work, so I don't think this particular contribution should have been entirely unexpected.

@Kiki the word you are meaning is “crafted”, as in “hand crafted”.

[Kiki]

Hi! Greetings from Japan! I am not a native English speaker but I can read in English that this "mail art " sent by Simon says : His Majesty and Governmant ... and Genocide. But, I cannot read what it says in the middle... It says : Hand What ? What is the word in the middle after Hand, please ? Thank you in advance!

[Zorica Obradović]

A well-meaning message: While censorship is certainly an important issue, global peace is, of course, of higher priority. Since this is your event, it is completely natural and acceptable that you and your team manage all the accompanying activities.

However, I believe William and the other members simply want to point out that, under these conditions, it no longer qualifies as mail art. Therefore, this cannot be considered a mail art exhibition—because in the mail art tradition, there should be no gatekeeping based on "artistic quality."

P.S. If you find this comment uncomfortable or unwelcome in any way, please feel free to delete it using the small "x" in the top right corner. Best regards from Serbia.

---

[Maxie Eulig]

No, that information was missing. I am surprised it would have been necessary, given that the subject matter and context were described in great detail. I am not censoring the piece—after all, I am displaying it here. However, I am organizing the exhibition together with my father; for him, the focus is on the craft itself, and he is providing the premises for the event. In this context, it feels inappropriate to draw attention to Germany’s historical guilt and the resulting responsibility for the present day. I feel pressured when required to exhibit a piece that provocatively overplays the issue. Moreover, the social climate—especially in East Germany—is tense; I see no need to add fuel to the fire. That said, the artistic merit of the work itself is certainly open for discussion—for instance, right here under this post ;)

[William M]

did your call explicitly state no political content? seems like you are censoring the inclusion because you disagree with the point of view. "everything is shown" is a longstanding tradition for mail art shows to avoid the type of gatekeeping you'd see in a traditional gallery or museum.