The brouhaha over the screening of “Diving Bell,” a documentary on the Sewol tragedy that is critical of the government’s failure to rescue the more than 300 passengers trapped inside the ferry, at this year’s Busan International Film Festival greatly tarnished the reputation of Asia’s premiere film festival, which celebrates its 20th anniversary next year. The documentary, on the other hand, received a lot of free publicity, an unintended yet assured consequence for those who opposed its screening.

Busan International Film Festival Organizing Committee chairman and Busan Mayor Seo Byung-soo publicly opposed the screening of “Diving Bell” as did the families of the Sewol ferry’s victims not associated with Danwon High School, without having seen the film. Adding fuel to the fire was a statement by BIFF commissioner Lee Yong-kwan, a statement since retracted, that a Culture Ministry official had informed him that the ministry would not provide financial support next year if the festival proceeded with the screening. During a parliamentary audit held on Oct. 7, several Saenuri Party legislators called on the government to withdraw funding for next year, about 1.4 billion won, if the film was screened.

The organizers went ahead with the screening, and justly so, vowing to preserve the festival’s independence and to uphold freedom of expression. People are drawn to controversy and the calls to withdraw the film ensured that “Diving Bell” attracted attention and audiences when it was screened twice at Busan. Riding on the success of its premiere at BIFF, the documentary, which its producers feared would have difficulty finding theater screens, opened in theaters Thursday.

The Gwangju Biennale was embroiled in a similar controversy over a banner painting commissioned for a special exhibition marking the biennale’s 20th anniversary. The painting by minjung artist Hong Seong-dam, titled “Sewol Owol,” depicted the Sewol ferry being hoisted up by a figure representing the so-called “Gwangju spirit.” What irked Gwangju Mayor Yoon Jang-hyun, who was also serving as the Gwangju Biennale Foundation chairman, was the depiction of President Park Geun-hye as a puppet controlled by her father, the late President Park Chung-hee, and Kim Ki-choon, the current presidential chief of staff who masterminded the drafting of the Yushin Constitution during the late Park’s presidency.

The painting, which was to have been exhibited at the Gwangju Museum of Art, was ultimately withdrawn by the artist on Aug. 8, following weeks of wavering on the work’s exhibition by the city and the foundation and the last-minute decision by the curators to “postpone” the piece from exhibition. The decision came after the painting had been unveiled at an opening ceremony.

The trouble in Gwangju continued to grow as other artists withdrew their works in protest. The exhibition, planned as a celebration of the Gwangju Biennale became funereal, perhaps even a death knell for the country’s foremost art event.

The controversy led to the resignations of head curator Yoon Beom-mo and Gwangju Biennale Foundation president Lee Yong-woo. Yoon also stepped down as the foundation chairman, assuming the post of honorary chairman. A committee has been created tasked with reforming the biennale, which has been losing visitors over the years.

A document sent by the city pressuring the foundation to cancel the exhibition of Hong’s work or return the city funds was produced during the parliamentary audit of Gwangju Metropolitan City, providing evidence of the city’s role in the debacle. The letter was dated Aug. 7, the same day that Yoon said it was up to the foundation to decide on the exhibition.

Speaking at the audit, Yoon said that artist’s creative freedom should be guaranteed, emphasizing that the city would provide financial and administrative support for the festival but not interfere. That statement came a little too late, after damage had been done. The censorship controversy greatly destroyed the reputation of the city, which aims to become Asia’s culture hub and which aspires to be the center of human rights, peace and democracy.

For arts festivals that rely on government funding, a threat to cut off funds is a threat to their very survival. This is why such threats are dastardly. Such threats, implicit or explicit, greatly constrain the independence of festival organizers and in turn restrict the freedom of artists.

Artists have always relied on the grace of their patrons to be able to do their work. For the most part, the patrons ― whether they be the aristocrats and the royalties of yore or today’s business conglomerates ― allow their artists to work without much interference. Public funding from the government and government organizations, however, are more problematic as the issue of the public good is involved.

Those who pressured BIFF and Gwangju Biennale organizers to stop works from being shown opposed them on the grounds that the works were too political. Yet, virtually everything we do is political, no less artistic endeavors. Conservative politicians rallied to the cause of guarding national dignity, arguing that state-funded festivals were featuring works that they claim damage the country’s dignity. Taxpayer money should not be spent on supporting works that degrade the country’s image, they claimed.

However, Koreans should be credited with more cultural sophistication than conservative politicians would allow. We appreciate the diversity of viewpoints expressed by films shown at BIFF. In fact, the reason BIFF is a sold-out affair is because it is an opportunity to see films that would be difficult to watch elsewhere.

Kim Dong-ho, who served as the BIFF director for 15 years, worked tirelessly to ensure that a wide spectrum of films would be shown, playing an instrumental role in revising the law to allow BIFF entries to be exempt from ratings by the ratings board. Kim, who now serves as the head of the Presidential Committee for Cultural Enrichment, said in a recent interview, “The unique nature of a film festival is that it is through a film festival that lively critique and criticisms take place.” Cultural festivals should be a place for vigorous exchange of ideas, and censorship, in any form, has no place them.

By Kim Hoo-ran

Kim Hoo-ran is an editorial writer at The Korea Herald. She can be reached at khooran@heraldcorp.com. ― Ed.