Exactly. Nobody can tell you what art means to you, but the flipside is that you can’t define what it means to them either.
4 Likes
art is as political as the viewer perceives it to be
3 Likes
can you explain what the word “political” means to you?
1 Like
Hey man if that’s how you feel about your art, that’s interesting context for the subjects within. I, as the person enjoying your art, find this context enriches my experience as a whole. While it isn’t the sole determining factor of my understanding of the piece, it certainly helps contextualize the imagery used both in terms of your overall portfolio as well as in relation to the world it was produced within.
Or it doesn’t. Again, it’s immaterial. Art is subjective, so is meaning. I can’t change how you write, but at the same time you can’t change how I read. Meaning can be imparted and assigned at either end of that tunnel.
2 Likes
I’d go one step further and say art is as anything as the observer perceives it to be.
3 Likes
If I have done my job I can influence how you read it and what you infer from it every post I make is influenced by how I pre shaped your perception of me .all art is not political, all art is a lie
1 Like
I’m entirely too stoned to answer that question with anything approaching a useful definition, especially since it’s not a concept I’d feel capable of summing up sober, but I’ll try to make do. I’ll try not to go too far up my own asshole with it.
Politics are the means by which Power is distributed, as well as the associated study therein. That’s study in the classical sense, not the academic one. Taking the time and effort to try and understand something is valid no matter where you do it.
Power is the ability to enforce your will with socially accepted violence. Owning a building allows you the protection of state sponsored paramilitary groups in the case of someone intruding upon it. Having a law restricting a behavior allows for the socially permitted apolication of violence to dissuade it.
Violence is the removal of choice. Whether it’s the choice to live where I live, or the choice to have all my teeth inside of my mouth where they are most useful to me.
I don’t think it would be a controversial statement to say that violence, as a force, should be wielded with mind paid to matters of morality. It serves to reason that we should not wish to encourage social acceptance of immoral violence.
As a direct consequence of this link, moral implications become the paramount concern of all politics, because the thing all politics have in common is that someone is going to get hurt. It matters who, why, how, by whom, and under what circumstances.
But someone will get hurt. No matter what.
Can you explain what the word “political” means to you
To me, it means literally anything relevant to any of the aforementioned concepts.
5 Likes
I want to offer an alternative.
I would argue all art is philosophical.
Even dada, the supposed anti-art, was founded on a philosophical concept of anti-intellectualism. One could argue that a specific piece of art may habe an underlying political notion attached to it, but I think its easier to consider what is the philosophy behind an art piece, and the effectiveness of said piece in conveying the philophical idea.
Lets take Squeakyfriend’s “the unicorn who flew”. Barring the depiction of a Christian church as a benefactor to the fluffy at the end of the story, I hardly see the story as political. But, philosophically, the art piece was an attempt at telling a children’s bedtime story with fluffies. From it, and despite this supposed veneer of our fandom as being overly mature and edgy, a story like Squeakyfriend’s suggests that fluffies could have value as a base for children’s stories.
This is one rejoinder. My question to you @Stwumpo is what you consider to be “politics” and “political power” to make a loaded statement as “all art is political”. To offer a rebound, I see philosophy as a meta subject, asking us “why” we do things and the basis of beliefs surrounding it.
6 Likes
Bearing this well reasoned point in mind, I suppose I’d refine my wording to “All art can carry political meaning and implication regardless of creative intent.”
Doesn’t sound as snappy, though. Little clumsy. Lots of syllables.
4 Likes
Well sure, but you can only control how you make art. You cannot control how I interpret it.
3 Likes
Also not for nothing but WOW all those posts landed at the same time and somehow hit in a legible order.
Its better to be accurate than to make an absolutist statement, as @Booperino points out. Nietszche may say “that which does not kill you makes you stronger”, but if taken out of context we can reasonably say that there are things that can not kill you and yet can still weaken you.
1 Like
Okay so hold on did the fluffy lift the alligator over its head and then do a kickflip?
It can be. But at times an absolutist statement can serve a rhetorical purpose, nonetheless.
imo, unless it is made with politics in mind, there’s nothing political about it
I like hurting fictional characters, there’s not much politics.
HOWEVER, if we’re talking my politics aka my moral compass, that is a very different story
2 Likes
It can, but I advise caution. Absolutist statements are a little dangerous, and I find that absolutist statements dont really work unless you really, really have a point you want to make with it. I’m a bit particular on this because ive seen too much drama started by absolutist statements.
2 Likes
I can every stroke I place can be a clue to lead your unconscious to the destination I desire if I choose to but in the effort
Yes it did
Wow dis bload up
Anyway if you make art about a tiger wearing a top hat after the president dies wearing a top hat ofc it’s gonna come off political even if coincidental I think, they’re right when they said that you can’t stop people from considering what they want as political
Also these are horses
5 Likes