On June 19, the Seoul Museum of Art (SeMA) issued an official statement regarding the censorship incident surrounding the exhibition catalogue of the Art Archives of the Seoul Museum of Art (SeMA AA). However, criticism from the Korean art community has only intensified in response.
 
The “censorship incident” began when it was revealed that a text by critic Nam Woong, originally intended for inclusion in the exhibition catalogue of 《Into Other Rivers》, a group exhibition at SeMA AA, had been rejected. The reason given was that the text contained criticism of former president Yoon Suk-yeol’s alleged plans for martial law, and that it was deemed to violate neutrality guidelines. 

In response, eight past recipients of the SeMA-Hana Art Criticism Award issued a joint statement denouncing the censorship and demanding an official apology as well as measures to prevent future incidents. On June 18, eight artists (or artist teams) participating in the exhibition also released their own statement in solidarity.

As the censorship incident continued to escalate, the Seoul Museum of Art (SeMA) issued an official statement on its website. The museum stated that it had “no intention whatsoever to exclude the text based on a particular political event or viewpoint,” and added, “During the review process, we engaged in discussions with the critic to consider whether the manuscript aligned with the curatorial intent and interpretation of the exhibition. However, we acknowledge and apologize that the matter was not handled with the level of caution and care it required.” 

The museum also announced plans to include critic Nam Woong’s manuscript in the exhibition catalogue scheduled for publication in December, along with the subsequent public statements, commentaries, press coverage, and a range of critical perspectives. Through this, SeMA aims to document and reflect on the entire incident with openness.

However, following the release of the museum’s statement, the art community strongly criticized SeMA’s stance, which framed the issue solely as a matter of communication without directly acknowledging the act of censorship. On June 21, a collective titled Artists’ Solidarity Against Censorship began circulating a public statement on social media, gathering solidarity signatures and amplifying resistance across the broader art world. 

As of June 25, over 600 individuals had signed the statement, including prominent Korean artists such as Nho Won Hee, IM Heung-soon, Haegue Yang, Mire Lee, Ayoung Kim, and Sojung Jun. This marks the first time in the history of South Korea’s national and public art institutions that such large-scale collective action has been taken by artists in protest of censorship by a specific museum.

In its statement, Artists’ Solidarity Against Censorship addressed the Seoul Museum of Art’s official response, emphasizing that “the fact remains unchanged: the museum informed the writer that publishing an article critical of martial law was not possible because the situation surrounding the martial law was still unresolved.”
 
They further pointed out that the notification was issued before the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the president’s impeachment on February 25, stating this “clearly proves that the museum’s upper management engaged in censorship with full awareness of the implications of criticizing martial law.”
 
The statement also criticized SeMA’s announcement to include voices surrounding the incident in the forthcoming exhibition catalogue, arguing that “by failing to acknowledge the act of censorship itself and instead framing the criticisms and challenges to the museum’s actions merely as ‘diverse critical perspectives’ to be ‘recorded and reflected upon with an open mind,’ the institution is attempting to reduce the issue to a token gesture.”  

It continued, “Such an attitude treats the raising of the censorship issue as a kind of institutional achievement, and is deeply insulting not only to the person directly affected, but also to the many critics, artists, curators, technicians, and viewers within and beyond the art world who are witnessing this incident.”

In addition, the Artists’ Solidarity Against Censorship demanded that the Seoul Museum of Art disclose in detail the decision-making process and communications related to the rejection of the essay; officially acknowledge the act as censorship and take clear responsibility for the wrongdoing; and establish concrete measures to prevent future recurrence. 

According to a press by The Hankyoreh, an official from the museum, speaking on the condition of anonymity, stated, “It is understood that the museum’s leadership, including the director, approved the exclusion of the essay due to pressure from external bodies such as the city council. Despite the unprecedented protest in the form of a collective petition against a public art institution, upper management’s response remains complacent and disconnected from common sense—leaving internal staff dismayed and confused.”

References

• 서울시립미술관, 서울시립 미술아카이브 전시도록 원고 수록 관련 입장문
• 검열에 반대하는 예술인 연대, [성명] 예술과 비평의 검열에 반대한다
• 한겨레, 서울시립미술관 ‘윤석열 비판 검열’ 발뺌식 해명에 미술계 분노 폭발, 2025.06.23