"Art is always subservient to Power"

[Binty]

Discuss.

[Squidusa]

I don't get it , can you post a little more about this argument?

Or maybe I just need more coffee. 

[Binty]

I don't get it , can you post a little more about this argument?

Or maybe I just need more coffee. 

The gist of the argument is that art is always subservient to political power.  I'm curious what people here think.

[Squidusa]

I don't get it , can you post a little more about this argument?

Or maybe I just need more coffee. 

The gist of the argument is that art is always subservient to political power.  I'm curious what people here think.

Subservient in what sense though?

I mean , being a good painter won't run a country (although , methinks several artists would do a better job than the eejits we currently have  ) such as being a politician won't make you a good commentator on artistic notions.

Or do you mean the argument , that a political argument about a certain issue is superior to an artistic commentary on the same issue?

fuck it , have some Royco. 

["couldbecousin"]

 I think Binty is talking about government censorship of art, or, more generally, the way artistic expression may be
 stifled by the political climate of whatever country the artist lives in.  Run with it, Squiddy! 

['andersom']

Bollocks. 

Art is  like words.

Can be subservient, can be subversive, can be not related to power at all.

Discussion closed. 

["couldbecousin"]

Bollocks. 

Art is  like words.

Can be subservient, can be subversive, can be not related to power at all.

Discussion closed. 

 You may not close this discussion without permission from the authorities!   

[Binty]

Bollocks. 

Art is  like words.

Can be subservient, can be subversive, can be not related to power at all.

Discussion closed. 

I agree but I need historical proof    I was having this discussion with my history class and everyone agreed with that statement; I was the only one who strongly disagreed.  Even the example I used, John Heartfield (who's my personal hero), was dismissed because he fled Nazi Germany.  Every example I came up with, someone managed to defeat it using history.  Which to me is as ridiculous as what some English Literature and Film Studies teachers always try to do - assign meaning to a piece of literature or film and deem their opinion as fact. 

['andersom']

Bollocks. 

Art is  like words.

Can be subservient, can be subversive, can be not related to power at all.

Discussion closed. 

I agree but I need historical proof    I was having this discussion with my history class and everyone agreed with that statement; I was the only one who strongly disagreed.  Even the example I used, John Heartfield (who's my personal hero), was dismissed because he fled Nazi Germany.  Every example I came up with, someone managed to defeat it using history.  Which to me is as ridiculous as what some English Literature and Film Studies teachers always try to do - assign meaning to a piece of literature or film and deem their opinion as fact.

They never thought about "Entartete Kunst"?

[Binty]

Bollocks. 

Art is  like words.

Can be subservient, can be subversive, can be not related to power at all.

Discussion closed. 

I agree but I need historical proof    I was having this discussion with my history class and everyone agreed with that statement; I was the only one who strongly disagreed.  Even the example I used, John Heartfield (who's my personal hero), was dismissed because he fled Nazi Germany.  Every example I came up with, someone managed to defeat it using history.  Which to me is as ridiculous as what some English Literature and Film Studies teachers always try to do - assign meaning to a piece of literature or film and deem their opinion as fact.

They never thought about "Entartete Kunst"?

They would argue that that still makes art subservient to power because in their opinion, art is always influenced by politics.  That "free-thinking" is non-existent as art (for them) is always a response to whatever is happening in their country at the time.

[Squidusa]

I think Binty is talking about government censorship of art, or, more generally, the way artistic expression may be
 stifled by the political climate of whatever country the artist lives in.  Run with it, Squiddy! 

Ahhhh now I get it.

in that case , then no Art isn't always subservient to power , some of the greatest protests are pieces of art. 

[Binty]

I think Binty is talking about government censorship of art, or, more generally, the way artistic expression may be
 stifled by the political climate of whatever country the artist lives in.  Run with it, Squiddy! 

Ahhhh now I get it.

in that case , then no Art isn't always subservient to power , some of the greatest protests are pieces of art. 

See my reply to hyke.

Also, I guess to fully argue this, one would have to define the concept of art, which I'm not sure is possible.

[Squidusa]

I think Binty is talking about government censorship of art, or, more generally, the way artistic expression may be
 stifled by the political climate of whatever country the artist lives in.  Run with it, Squiddy! 

Ahhhh now I get it.

in that case , then no Art isn't always subservient to power , some of the greatest protests are pieces of art. 

See my reply to hyke.

Also, I guess to fully argue this, one would have to define the concept of art, which I'm not sure is possible.

Have the people in your class ever heard of cubist or surrealist art?

and as for the definition of art , I have a saying for that "Art is everything by definition" , meaning everyone has differing views on what is and isn't art but that doesn't mean it is or isn't art. 

[Osensitive1]

Also, I guess to fully argue this, one would have to define the concept of art, which I'm not sure is possible.

Art and power are both abstract nouns. There's no right answer.

["couldbecousin"]

Also, I guess to fully argue this, one would have to define the concept of art, which I'm not sure is possible.

Art and power are both abstract nouns. There's no right answer.

 "Power" is also sometimes a verb, "art" never is.  Discuss.