Source: Texas Penal Code 1984
As debates over censorship and artistic freedom intensify nationwide, Texas artists are confronting a complex legal landscape that can hinder their freedom of expression.
Censorship and the broader implication of obscenity laws present challenges for artists and curators reconciling artistic creativity with legal restrictions.
In an interview with The Rider, Chloe Kempf, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, shed light on the growing challenges facing visual artists in the state due to restrictive laws and censorship.
Kempf described the impact of Senate Bill 12, the so-called drag ban, which was blocked in federal court. While the law was temporarily halted, she warned it represents a broader trend of censorship targeting artistic expression.
“It threatened the First Amendment rights of not only drag performers in Texas but really anybody who engages in artistic visual performance,” the attorney said.
Kempf added the importance of understanding the legal framework surrounding obscenity laws, such as Texas Penal Code 43.22, which can be used to censor artistic expression.
“Art, a piece of art viewed as a whole, has to be patently offensive as judged by community standards,” she said about the code. “It has to appeal to the prurient interest in sex, and it has to lack literary, artistic or scientific value.”
Kempf cautioned that these laws are often used as a “smokescreen” to target LGBTQ+ content and expression, rather than addressing true obscenity.
“A lot of the censorship … that the ACLU of Texas has their eye on, is censorship of LGBTQ artists, art and books,” she said.
To combat censorship, Kempf urged artists to stay informed about their rights, engage in local and state politics and speak out against government restrictions.
The ACLU of Texas offers support to artists facing censorship through a dedicated form on their website, aclutx.org/en/request-legal-assistance.
Studio art senior Heidi Stubberud said she experienced firsthand the impact of Texas obscenity laws.
Stubberud said her intimate and revealing artwork, exploring themes of intimacy and the human form, was deemed too explicit to be displayed at the Silver Jell-O art show Oct. 25 at the Comminos Center for the Arts in Harlingen.
Of the three pieces Stubberud submitted, only one was displayed. The other two depicted the male nude as her subject at the point or climax of an erection, and a female nude exposing her breast and buttock.
“Some people may say that it’s disgusting to see it, but I think it’s beautiful,” she said. “It’s part of the human form. It’s part of life itself, and I wanted viewers to connect to that [and] not see it as something filthy.”
The decision to censor her work was based on Texas Penal Code 43.22, otherwise known as the “obscenity law,” which Stubberud said she was unaware of until the exhibition.
“I was actually very sad … not because I, like, want to promote, like, [being] promiscuous, but because I put a lot of effort throughout the years to be able to display my art,” Stubberud said.
Sean Hughes, the show’s curator and a studio art senior, told The Rider that the one-day show opened during Harlingen Art Night, which is billed as a family friendly event.
“The owner is an educator with [the Harlingen Consolidated Independent School District], which often has his students and their parents come through,” Hughes said. “I decided that displaying her pieces that are very sexual in nature would be at minimum reckless since I have no control over admission.”
He added that while he supports artistic expression, he also recognizes that different contexts require different considerations.
“I can see on face value it appears to be censorship,” Hughes said. “In this case, it was a group show I organized by invitation. I chose to omit the [the two] pieces, based on the laws, the event billing and the potential legal and civil issues.”
He said he aimed to curate an exhibition that showcased photography as an art form, educating the public and inspiring future generations.
“This isn’t a reflection on the artist’s choices and value of the artist’s work,” Hughes said. “It’s not commentary on if it’s art. It was purely a choice of the purpose of the show, the audience and compliance with law.”
Stubberud said she was left feeling disheartened and frustrated that challenging the sexualization of both men and women was frowned upon. She felt it is a theme lacking in the Rio Grande Valley art scene.
“I feel, like, there’s still something that we don’t touch upon, which is usually the sexualization of women in art and even men,” she said. “One of my pieces was actually for men. I wanted them to feel included, not in the standard way, but [in] that little cage that people usually put a woman’s body in.”
She added her concern about the potential impact of such censorship on young artists, who may be discouraged from exploring their creativity and pushing boundaries.
“It makes me feel trapped,” Stubberud said, emphasizing the need for spaces where artists can freely express their ideas without fear of repercussions.
She hopes to raise awareness about the issue of censorship and the importance of providing platforms for diverse artistic expressions.
“I really hope that there’s some talk about censorship, not only for nudity … like, I want people to be able to actually photograph things that they want, or draw things that they want without having an issue with it later on,” Stubberud said.
