08 August 1997
The Real Scandal
Jennie Bristow takes issue with a 'non-nude photo' scandal
Picture the scene. A 44 year old man takes a picture of a 24 year old woman
sitting the wrong way round on a chair. This is part of his work for a City
and Guilds Professional Photography course at a local Further Education
college. A 30 year old man gatecrashes the class one night, sees what is
going on and complains to the college management. Police search the homes
of the course lecturer, 46 year old Dennis Dunning, and the model. The
college suspends the lecturer, who subsequently resigns, and shuts down the
photography course, with the students only weeks away from their
examinations. On 12 August, the story appears in the national press.
It may be 'silly season' for the press, but while there is plenty to
ridicule in this story the chain of events here is important. Putting aside
whatever injustices have been done to the lecturer, his students and the
model in question, the prudery and censorship involved in this case is
indicative of something more. Attempts at creativity are increasingly
derided as minimising 'offensiveness' becomes the order of the day. Adults
are treated as children, and lecturers as babysitters. You can say what you
like, provided you say nothing. And that's why the students at Stockton and
Billingham College of Further Education, Teeside, are complaining.
It is hardly surprising that the students do not know what they did wrong
here. Julie Clayton, who modelled for the controversial pose (a rather poor
imitation of a pose made famous by Christine Keeler, the call-girl at the
heart of the Profumo affair in the 1960s), was herself an art student at
the college. She was 24 years old - hardly a minor. Furthermore, she claims
that she was not nude in this and a few other poses, although the
photographs give the suggestion that she was.
When you consider that art classes since the beginning of time have
involved women posing nude (it used to be called 'Life Drawing'), there do
not seem to be many grounds for complaint here. Everyone in the class was a
mature student, and well over the age of consent. The photographs were
neither original nor shocking: as Clayton rightly pointed out to the Daily
Telegraph, 'similar photographs can be seen every day in newspapers,
magazines and on advertising hoardings' (12 August). Nor were the
photographs intended for public consumption: it is only as a result of the
press coverage provoked by the college's actions that anybody outside the
Stockton course came to be aware of their existence. So why the
over-reaction?
Clearly, what is at issue here is not the photographs themselves, but the
desire for a Further Education (FE) college to promote a 'decent',
non-controversial image at any cost. In this context, any attempt at a bit
of original or risqu thinking is clamped down on.
The 'Keeler pose controversy' comes at a time when the primary raison
d' tre of the FE sector seems to be getting in more students and more
funding, through offering courses in anything and everything to students
ranging from under 16s to over 85s. Having spent may years recruiting
mature students, FE colleges now have their eyes on the younger sector of
the market, running weekend classes for kids, enticing post-16s away from
school and others away from the dole. Practising a policy of maximum income
and minimum expenditure seems to be the only way FE colleges can see their
way to surviving, investing in the prospectus while cutting back on
everything else.
But this kind of strategy has consequences. The first is, obviously, that
there are a lot of students being ripped off, through enrolling on
ill-thought out courses aimed at getting the funding and the qualifications
through without any thought given to the content. The students whose City
and Guilds course has been cut short may moan about stifled creativity, but
nobody is motivated to run this course as a means to encourage creativity.
It is just a way of getting students through the college, and if the
'creativity' expressed by members of the course risks marring the college's
image, there is every rationale for the college to put a stop to it. Image
and money is everything: the only people who even think of developing
talent or creativity in the FE sector are the students.
More importantly, the emphasis on recruiting both younger and older
students to the local FE college means that the perceived role of lecturers
changes. Previously, FE colleges were predominantly for adults, and even
over-16s in FE were considered to be adults. Now, in line with the greater
pastoral responsibility university lecturers are seen to have for their
over-18 students, lecturers in FE are perceived in a similar position to
school teachers. In the institutional relationship between student and
lecturer, even the most mature mature student is perceived as a child, for
whom the lecturer has responsibility.
The recent events at Stockton and Billingham college illustrate this point
well. Police raids on the homes of Dunning and Clayton gave an air of a
paedophilia scare to the case - even though all the people involved were
old enough to have kids of their own. Shutting the course down was done
because of the irresponsible image the college might have earned -
especially to parents worrying about where to send their offspring for
their post-16 qualifications. If Dunning can be seen to have done anything
wrong, it can only be that he believed his students to be adult enough to
get on with their work, rather than taking on his 'responsibility' to keep
things fully-clothed and tame.
But the fact remains, this is an issue of freedom of speech, restricted in
the most extreme ways. When all the forces at work in FE push the
management towards preserving their public image, conservatism and
restriction, the students at Stockton and Billingham may have a tough fight
ahead of them. Good luck to them, I say. Their photos may not be worth
looking at twice, but anyone committed to challenging censorship will argue
that they should be able to take them.
For another example of free speech under threat in further and higher
education, look out for Free Speech Branded by Jennie Bristow in the
forthcoming issue of LM.
Join a discussion on this commentary