|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
is
all art political?
Is the very nature of art itself political? Can there be art without
politics? Does art have the potential to transform the world?
“My position is that you cannot work towards peace being peaceful,"
says the artist Krzysztof Wodiczko. “To prevent
the world from bloody conflict, we must sustain a certain kind
of adversarial
life in which we are struggling with our problems in public. [...]
Art in general seems to be a very useful artifice. Film, theater,
painting, literature, media art—all of this is a very good
conduit for transmitting the things which people would rather not
hear or see. This is a possibility for transmitting something uncanny,
something that ought to be hidden but comes to light.”
“Pleasure is very political and pleasure is part of what controls
people,” says the artist Jessica Stockholder. “How you
make sense of living, how you make sense of emotional life, how
you make sense
of struggle and pleasure—those things have social and political
implications. But I’m not working here trying to change the
world—it's not political in that sense and I’m not
illustrating political propaganda or an agenda. I discover what
the politics might be in the work through the process of being
engaged in it.”
What is your opinion? SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
|
|
