What The &$?! : Singapore Censorship and the Arts
- Nicki Chan
Share this :
Being an arts practitioner in a conservative city-state is exhausting. What do you do when your own rulers ban your hard work?
Before Disney’s Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker hit Singapore cinemas, a scene was cut from the movie in order for the movie to be rated PG13 instead of being restricted to those 18 and older. The scene in question? A brief, blink-or-you’ll-miss-it kissing scene between two minor female characters in the background.
Looking back, it seems rather extreme a length to go to, but we certainly are no stranger to censorship. After all, we won’t be seeing The Prophet and the Space Aliens at Perspectives 2021, as it was only approved for screening with cuts and our festival policy is to screen films in their entirety.
Media in Singapore has always been highly regulated by the Infocomm Media Development Authority, with many local arts creators fighting their fair share of censorship battles over the years. Local film director Tan Pin Pin’s To Singapore, With Love was banned from public screening in 2014 because it “undermined national security”, with multiple appeals by both the director and the public having no effect. Singaporean filmmaker Royston Tan also had 27 cuts made to his 2003 film, 15, as it was seen as a threat to “national law and order”. In retaliation, Tan made a short film mocking the censorship his film had been forced to undergo.
Tan’s frustration is relatable. Despite Singapore’s comprehensive developments as a first-world country, the archaic laws governing censorship over the years have not changed much.
When questioned about censorship, our country’s leaders have reasoned that Singaporeans’ mindsets are what shapes censorship. In order to reduce discord amongst the public, discussion of controversial subjects is kept to a minimum. However, many instances of censorship in film and TV are not openly made known to Singaporeans, especially with regards to cut scenes in free-to-air TV. Without being an active Internet user and one who regularly consumes news from various sources, it would be difficult to know what content has been censored from the films we see on TV and in cinemas. How can we say that this is what we want if we don’t know what we aren’t seeing when watching a cut film for the first time?
Instead, it is more appropriate to say that censorship is shaping public opinion in a specific direction, preventing society from moving forward. For example, mainstream media in Singapore must not include content that promotes or justifies homosexuality. This is despite Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong explicitly stating that LGBT people are welcome in Singapore, but rationalising that the unchanging censorship laws are to accommodate social norms and give them time to shift. However, when any mention of homosexuality is shut down by mainstream media, people are unable to socially and politically acclimatise themselves to the changing times. This sets the standard for the acceptable norm in Singapore and is what I think is part of the reason social norms are taking so long to shift.
“To Singapore with Love has ‘distorted and untruthful’ accounts of past history” via The Straits Times
On the contrary, negative LGBT representation was broadcasted by none other than Mediacorp themselves in the Channel 8 drama My Guardian Angels. This exclusionary media representation drew much criticism, as censorship has done nothing but stigmatise LGBT people despite the government’s assurance to the contrary.
Perhaps the most puzzling question is why the government chooses to enforce these censorship laws when they are clearly outdated. As modern society has progressed, mindsets have shifted and younger Singaporeans are more open-minded. More importantly, our high education and literacy rate ensures that Singaporeans would not be blindly influenced by controversial content. If anything, censorship only draws attention to whatever has been censored— a week after To Singapore, With Love was banned here, a few hundred Singaporeans crossed the border to watch the film in Malaysia.
Despite repeated censorship-related setbacks, local creatives continue to fight to put their work out there, drawing more and more attention each time. Theatre director Ong Keng Sen faced many censorship hurdles while directing the Singapore International Festival of Arts from 2014 to 2017. Most notably, 15 photos from an Iranian photographer were banned from one of the festival exhibitions in 2016. However, the banned photographs were replaced with black cards and the exhibition transformed into an explicitly political stance on censorship.
Ong Keng Sen redefined accessibility and engagement via Prestige
The fact that creatives have to fight this hard to get their work seen in 21st century Singapore is more than a little concerning. But with each step they take, they raise more awareness and move others to take a stand against censorship. It is also for this reason that Perspectives Film Festival has made a conscious decision to display and advertise The Prophet and the Space Aliens in our lineup, even though we have ultimately chosen not to screen it out of respect for the director’s unaltered creative vision.
Solos director Loo Zihan could not have said it better: “The persistence and dedication of Singaporean performance artists to their practice, even after the ‘persecution’ by the state and others within the artistic community, inspires my current practice.”
So we shall keep paying more to watch our banned films elsewhere, shall go the extra mile to unearth all the films that didn’t deserve to be cut. And let the battle wage on.
Share this :