In the context of God is Great (no. 2), explain the Response of the Tate Britain debate.
Latham was angered by the Tate's decision: "Tate Britain has shown cowardice over this . . . it isn't even a gesture as strong as censorship, just a loss of nerve." In his view, the artwork was "not offensive to anybody" and not "anti-Muslim". He wrote to the gallery stating that if they were not going to display the artwork then they should relinquish possession and return it to him, although admitted that he thought it unlikely that they would do so. The Tate conceded that in its notice in the gallery, it would state that they had removed the piece "without the consent" of the artist. Latham died on 1 January 2006, before the retrospective exhibition had finished.The British media soon picked on the story and various newspaper columns were devoted to it.
The civil rights advocacy group Liberty also criticised the gallery's decision; its director, Shami Chakrabarti, expressed concern at the "signal this sends at a time when we see free speech quite significantly under threat" in Britain.
The Secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie, stated that he was unaware of any Muslim group that had protested against the display of the artwork, but that he respected the Tate's decision if they felt it to be "deeply offensive to the believers of the three religions". The Council also stated that it had wished that the Tate had consulted them before making the decision, adding that "sometimes presumptions are incorrectly made about what is unacceptable to Muslims and this can be counter-productive."Tate Britain organised a panel to debate the issue in November, titled "Sacred, Sacrosanct or Just Art?: The Politics and Place of Art in the Public Arena". One of those on the panel was the commentator Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. She noted that the debate was "more interesting and vital than that tired old match between absolutist libertarians and those who advocate censorship." In her view, the Tate's decision was wrong, but understandable. She expressed frustration that the Tate's decision displayed an attitude that assumed Muslims to be fanatical and intolerant, and articulated the view that the millions of "liberal, secular, and open minded" Muslims around the world were "offended by the decision that assumed we are all volatile and unlikely to understand such works." As a Muslim, she regarded the sculpture itself as "an extraordinary representation of devout belief in one God and universe".Another member of the panel was the commentator Anthony Julius. Regarding the artwork itself, he thought it "uninformed", believing that it did not reflect "any particularly intimate understanding of the traditions that it purports to represent." Specifically, he thought it confused to have a whole copy of the Quran coupled with only part of the Talmud, which he thought reflected ignorance as to the nature of Jewish scripture and its relationship with Islamic text. He opposed the Tate's decision to remove the artwork from display, suggesting that the possibility of the sculpture being damaged was minimal, the threat to gallery visitors "exceptionally unlikely", and that if needed, additional security could have been employed. He further suggested that the Tate should have consulted Latham before making the decision, because the artist—although no longer the legal owner of the piece—should remain in control of "the integrity of the work".
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown Shami Chakrabarti Quran right Islam Tate Britain Anthony Julius Muslim Council of Britain Iqbal Sacranie Liberty Talmud