A textbook definition of sociopolitical art: used to assist people in comprehending political and social issues, by creating art that expresses concerns regarding specific social and political agendas. Political artists are also known to use their work as a form of propaganda.
This definition points to the purpose of protest art. An artistic activist often creates work that functions as cultural activism; it doesn't seek to change a law or the system, but inspires people to act in ways that will. Like Reed said, a politician won't listen to or view the art and change. Only individuals can change the government. Art opens our eyes to the issues. It sheds light upon what is dark. It reveals what might often be concealed. It opens our eyes to our privilege, what we try to ignore, the darkness of the world and disconnect between human beings, death, suffering and pain. These issues often seem beyond our comprehension. But the artist aids us in understanding what seems far from us. The artist inspires us to join the fight or advance a cause. Without artists, we may never understand the plight of humanity. We may never understand what it means and meant to be alive — past and present — in all of life's glory and tragedy. We may never feel called to be an activist or a champion of social justice. Art changes our hearts and, as a result, attempts to change the world by inspiring the viewers and listeners to do the same.
0 Comments
-Art as SITE: murals, graffiti, wall art, posters
-Backlash against white homogenization of the other (Native Americans) -A way to "restore the people to themselves" -Utilizing media and political trends to drawn upon exploitation; use aesthetics in protests and art to draw attention to a dominant narrative and protest it \"The music doesn't change governments. Some politician isn't going to be changed by music he hears. But we can change people — individual people. The people can change governments" (Art of Protest, pp. 30-31) -A civil rights activist
I found it interesting that Reed said that freedom songs were often most important for those sitting on the fence about joining the movement (31). The songs asked questions like, "Which side are you on?" Therefore, music was not simply a tactic used to unite those already in the movement, bring hope or allow a wave of calm to wash over a people scared and desperate for answers. Music was a way activists conveyed issues in a way that would demand their attention. It was also a way, as Reed writes, to promote individualism and connectedness (paraphrased). Songs like "We Shall Overcome," initially titled "I'll be Alright, begin with personal statements of belief about a larger collective of people. Individuals contributed to the creation and changed the song over time, but it was adopted by a group of young protesters (SNCC- The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee). It gave the masses a shared identity rooted in culture and tradition, which united people across the movement. Music disrupted the dominant discourse and stood within an unpopular ideology in attempts to popularize it. We also discussed that we could describe Heidegger's thoughts on art as a "way to lift humanity beyond its toil," and I would describe these freedom songs as a way of doing so. In February, I sang freedom songs and spirituals with my choir for a Black History Month benefit concert. We sang "City Called Heaven," a dark spiritual full of lament and pain. It was, essentially, what Reed would call a captivity narrative. I am a pilgrim, a pilgrim of sorrow / I'm left in this wide world, this wide world alone / I'm trying to make it; make heaven my home. It touched on, in an indirect way, issues of slavery and hints at heaven as a place where those fighting (non-violently) could finally be free. This is a song about trudging toward freedom. It could inspire others to keep marching for their freedom and equality; a song as deeply emotional as this could rile the tired or inspire a type of internalized anger necessary for protesting. This is also another example of individualization among the larger "we." Though this song uses "I" language, any African-American could relate to the pain of slavery, segregation and/or discrimination. Songs like this connect those who sing them with their past — often rooted in the gospel tradition — and continue to spread the history of the movement. The music is a way to remind people about the struggles of their ancestors. I also think this song, in particular, is an interesting example of "solidifying one's faith against fear," as we discussed in class. Though they are facing tremendous adversity, those who sing this song believe they will one day make heaven their home. They have to believe in order to face a fear-inducing reality and fight against it. Here's a link to "City Called Heaven": www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCa4WHH9v_Y Maybe.
Maybe it's time we fight for the fighters Maybe it's time we open the eyes of the blind Maybe it's time they see the divine, the good in each soul Maybe it's time we stand with the vulnerable, give them a hand to hold. Maybe it's time we graffiti love instead of hate, Maybe it's time we speak up about mental health before it's too late. Maybe it's time we protect everyone, white, brown or black, Maybe it's time we strive for a brighter future and never look back. Maybe it's time to hold the one who held you, Love the one who loved you, Speak for the one not spoken to, Cry out for the one who cries, too. Maybe it's time to use our voices, use our talents, use our gifts, use our art, use our time, use our mind. Maybe it's time we use what we know and put on a show to change the status quo. I found a deeply personal connection to this art and activism project. I am a journalist. Writing is my art form — yes, I do believe it is an art. It takes skill, creativity in my storytelling and a knack for getting others to open up to me (this in and of itself can feel like an art form in at times). Writing is a powerful form of activism because, as the cliche goes, sometimes writing can convey what no one could ever say out loud. This is how I feel quite often.
I wrote a piece for our student newspaper during the recent presidential election campaigning about Donald Trump's "locker room talk" comments, and made claims that they perpetuate rape culture and dismiss women as unimportant and toxic to society. My writing sparked anger within many — primarily those who thought I was simply another liberal bashing conservatives for the fun of it — and I knew because there were a fair number of hateful comments directed at me. I also wrote a piece on hate crimes and groups for my journalism internship this semester and a hate group actually Tweeted at me claiming I was lying and questioning my research/ journalistic abilities. This discouraged and upset me for a moment. However, my journalism professor and internship adviser said, "If you aren't upsetting people, you aren't doing your job [as a religion reporter specifically]." Her comment made me think back to all of the backlash I've received on news pieces uncovering injustice and opinion pieces criticizing sexist public officials like Donald Trump. It changed my perspective. I felt like an activist using my art to promote a cause that may be uncomfortable for some. Therefore, I was challenging a norm or the status quo. I sought to I brought issues to light that were challenging to discuss or controversial, which takes bravery, passion and courage. The things I write about are important to me and affect me on a deep level. I write in a raw and truthful manner, both in my news and opinion coverage. I believe that this type of writing from any journalist or author is activism at its finest as they use their gifts and talents in the best way they can. This could simply uncover social faux pas, or start an entire movement or protest depending on the breadth of coverage. But journalists and writers are certainly artistic servant leaders. Here are links to my writings I discussed above: http://www.gonzagabulletin.com/opinion/article_e4ec9a0c-a1fd-11e6-93b2-97c798fe8b58.html http://spokanefavs.com/hate-groups-alive-and-well-in-spokane-region/ (I will offer some brief personal commentary about protest art in Trumpian times and some commentary on it from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Benjamin writes that once art loses is authenticity, it is related to a practice different from art in many ways: politics. He develops this point in both sections four and five of his essay, "The Work of Art...". Authenticity is derived from the work's aura — what Benjamin describes as the "strange tissue between time and space" or, more simply, the object's vibe. Authenticity is also rooted in ritual and tradition. When art strays from this and is distributed to the masses through technological means, it is politicized in Benjamin's eyes. The first work of art I have on this post is a photo of a sculpture by Trump that has been reproduced (or, rather, distributed) through technological means, including social media, online news media and other outlets. Its sole purpose is to act as a means of political protest; the work itself has a high amount of exhibition value via the internet and its placement in a gallery. Kant also says that true art is absent of purpose, and a work like this certainly serves one. However, I feel that Benjamin might appreciate the work because, though it is politicized, its exhibition is not for the sake of consumerism or mass distribution. This work also ties in with Benjamin's perceptions of photography that do not allow for "free-floating contemplation" and "demand a certain perception"; essentially, this photo is propaganda and it has a clear message that it projects onto the viewer. However, as I stated in a previous montage, Benjamin does honor the emancipative properties of photography and believes it can be used to bring light to pressing issues or free certain peoples. I definitely think that the photograph of this sculpture is emancipatory in a way because it sheds light on Trump's character and leads people toward the path of taking action against a prejudiced politician. Here's an explanation of the sculpture directly from the CBC. I found it interesting and telling The artist's message is clear: Trump is a pig, a megalomaniac and almost sociopathic: 'UK artist James Ostrer (whose unsettling portraiture recently appeared at Regina's Dunlop Art Gallery) brought his latest exhibition, "The Ego System," to Hong Kong in late March. He calls the pictures "honesty portraits," and how does he see Trump? He's a pile of meat wearing a wig. That's the literal interpretation, in any case. Emotional Download, Ostrer's Trump portrait, is a sculpture of raw fish, chewed pastry and some mangled animal parts for Trump's eyes and snout, all squished into a blue suit. It's a picture of Trump's megalomania, says the artist, and as he explained to Reuters, it's "got to the point where his need for attention is overriding any kind of relationship or care for anyone else in the world."' I have also placed other examples of political protest art in light of the Trump administration on this post for viewing pleasure, too. One, which I find particularly funny, is an actor dressed as Trump walking with female protesters holding their own "patriotic" art, which seems satirical to me in light of post-election feminist protests. Blowin' in the Wind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G58XWF6B3AA
Lyrics to the song: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bobdylan/blowininthewind.html Bob Dylan's song "Blowin' in the Wind" is a form of activism. This is only one example of his many songs that are about social issues and almost act as pleas to members of society. He serves both the role of artist and activist through his lyrics, one among a plethora of reasons that he was more than deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize for Literature. His artistic activism through music is yet another way — like Angelou's work — of revealing what is concealed or what we often ignore. Here, Bob Dylan "places himself in the strife" between world and earth and lives in that rift, Heidegger would say. His art and creativity exist in the rift. The difference between world and earth, particularly in Dylan's work, is this: the world is a kind of ideal, egalitarian connected utopia where we know the answers to the questions he poses in the song. The world is where human beings are disconnected, prejudice runs rampant and divisions occur. The world is reality. This song promotes activism or prods people to question norms through its short chorus: The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind. This song, written in the early 60s, was relevant during a time of ever-present prejudice, drugs, war and protest movement throughout the U.S. What I hear when listening to this song: the answers to all of the difficult societal questions about slavery throughout the world, war and suffering that the song poses are blowing away in the wind. We refuse to answer them. We turn our heads. The song even suggests that we often act as bystanders and ignore what is right under our noses. Even though this art reveals many important truths rooted in the dysfunction and social sins of our world — and asks the important questions — we still try to conceal what ails our country and the world as a whole. Therefore, we grope for the answers, but they blow away from us in the breeze and we can't chase after them (or, rather, we do not want to). The instrumentals of the song are simple and repetitive, as are the lyrical structures, so the listener can focus on the theme, message and actual text of the song. While Dylan does not have particular talent as far as his singing voice goes, you hear the raw emotion in it, which makes his music far more impactful than the lyrics would alone. NPR wrote a 2000 article about the hard questions the song still asks today 50 years after its debut. Here's a quote from Peter Yarrow of Peter, Paul and Mary, who sang the song shortly after Dylan wrote it: "When we sang it, it was in a field where probably I'd say, oh, 5,000 of the poorest people I'd ever seen, all of them black. And they waited in the rain for a couple of hours 'cause the sound system had gone to the wrong destination. We sang it very slowly, very, very—in a very determined way, but with a sense of the weariness of the people that surrounded us." This connects to our discussion in class on "Art of Protest" and the chapter on freedom songs: a song can evoke a certain mood. Though this was not a protest and more of a concert setting, the band was addressing a poor and marginalized population and sang the song in a way that reflected their struggles and — as Peter says — their weariness. However, the band still chose to sing the song in a determined manner, possibly in an attempt to inspire the marginalized to rise up against their oppressors and society as a whole, and evoke feelings of hope. A Dylan scholar says the song was more a product of the times than a product of Dylan himself, which is an interesting way to approach art and activism. We have discussed art as stemming from an individual's creative process and relationship to their craft (as well as their talent) in our class, but it's important to know that art of this nature stems is a "sign of the times," for lack of a better cliche phrase. As Kant would say, the art is conditioned by our culture and history, and when art takes the form of activism, it is often trying to challenge this conditioned state of being. Activist art is a product of society, the political system, the social climate and societal ailments. Someone said the song evokes hope alongside sadness and confusion, to which I would agree. It leans toward an answer to problems that most anyone could face but never reaches one entirely. Link to the NPR article: http://www.npr.org/2000/10/21/1112840/blowin-in-the-wind Here's the link to the TEDTalk itself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HjpZoYMw_E
Let me preface this post by saying that I specifically checked out some TEDTalks to try and find when I liked about social change, activism and art. I had about 20 + options to sift through, which I found inspiring and obviously indicative of the importance of this topic that we as a class are focusing on right now. However, I enjoyed the one I linked to above by Shannon Galpin titled "Art as activism" the most out of any. Everywhere you walk, you are surrounded by art and artists, often through public art, she says. Public art brings art outside the galleries and surrounds us with it, she says. Talk about art for the masses without consumerism. Benjamin says that art if often a commodity in culture and is contingent upon societal structure. However, he would enjoy the public art Galpin speaks of because it "art for the people." It is not meant for consumption though it is consumed. It is the polar opposite of art for the sake of capitalism and distraction. Galvin goes on to describe art as a "sudden little burst of beauty," which made me think of Kant. Kant believes that an experience of the beautiful takes place in a specific moment in time. It's rooted in time and place and isn't generalized but is specific and concrete I found her wording so similar to Kant's theory of aesthetics, a burst being a small, specific moment in time. Public art, she says, shouldn't be limited to urban areas and commissioned works. Work like Bansky's spray-painted art, which we have discussed in class, belongs in conflict zones like Palestine and other war-torn areas. It has the ability to reach the masses and change their perceptions, which is what I have been trying to say throughout theses posts. It gives a voice to the once voiceless. Overall, her theme is that we see stories of everyday people in a conflict or war zone that we may not pay attention to, or those that may not be shown in the media, through art (specifically public art that she speaks about). We see the death, war and genocide, but not necessarily the way someone like you or I would live in this devastation on a daily basis. Love, dreaming and inventing. She calls these stories with conflict as the background "real, valuable and inspiring." She says that photography is the most effective form of communicating these stories because you don't need an art degree to appreciate the work. It conveys emotion. It is a universal way to tell a story. I think Benjamin would agree with her (and myself) on photography's power, especially because it can be distributed to the masses, but may not agree that it accurately captures the human countenance. However, I think he is wrong; photography is often the only way we can genuinely see a human life or the way one suffers — especially those in the Middle East — and that type of raw footage is an indirect form of activism. It gets people riled up and interested in a cause or a people. It speaks volumes that a painting or a poem might not be able to. She calls herself an activist by creating a life-size public street exhibition for the Afghan people, who we often ignore. She gives them a place to create and share their story with the masses. This is not for profit (for her of the Afghans) or spectacle; it is simply a vehicle for which this in an area torn by conflict can tell their stories. I would say that her work creating life-size photographs that she transports to villages is activism; she is obviously passionate about telling the story of these people, uses her creativity to do so and sheds light upon issues that an entire population faces. I think her work is desperately needed in a country where two words immediately pop into our heads when we locate it on a map: War. Violence. Here are some examples of public art in Afghanistan: ,In my internet searches on artistic activism and examples of it, I stumbled across something interesting that I'd never seen before in my time as an artist: The Center for Artistic Activism. The center has branches throughout the world, including the U.S., Netherlands, Kenya and South Africa, which shows that social and political activism and its ties to art is an important global talking point. The center's goal is to "explore, analyze and strengthen connections between social activism and artistic practice." The website even says that art is more than what I would describe as a type of isolated tactic but rather a "philosophy" or "practice" in and of itself. People are actually looking at artistic activism as a PHILOSOPHY, which directly ties into the title of this course and our fundamental questions: What is art? What is its purpose? This center is trying to claim that, in some ways, art NEEDS to be used to promote sociopolitical agendas. Artists, it claims, are major players in social revolutions or societal change. The center even has a School for Creative Activism to train artists in this practice. It teaches cultural strategies and practices effective for past protesters and organziers, ways to plan campaigns and protests that utilize visual and other creativity, ways to recognize strengths within communities (especially artistic ones), and build a network of artists to make organizing more creative and effective in a world saturated by media and "spectacle" — which Benjamin would call art that "distracts us" or is simply "entertainment" rather than enriching in any way. This center and its school wants to draw upon mass distraction and our attraction to mass media that is meant to dazzle and use it in artwork and organization to draw people toward a cause. The school teaches "creative ways to engage politics," presumably, in my opinion, to get a larger mass of people involved through channels like social media, art galleries or modern music. Thus, the organizers or campaigners broaden their appeal, which is a key reason for using art for the sake of activism/protest.
Link to the center's website: https://artisticactivism.org INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT:
Heidegger says that most art at its core stems from poetry and language. Therefore, language and crying out against social injustices can start a revolution. As The Beatles once sang, "You wanna start a revolution." Poetry is certainly telling because the written word conveys strife and pain that is essentially unsayable. It transcends what we can even comprehend at times. We have often described art as a form of catharsis in class, and I believe art as activism can often be the same. It is a way to describe and name deep-seated pain while championing a cause and speaking out against social sins. We feel through art and this inspires others to feel. Art sparks social change or paints the backdrop for it. Read below for my first poetic exploration into cultural activism and art. "Still I Rise" by Maya Angelou: Link: https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/still-i-rise In the Poetry Foundation's exploration of literary activism, the author says that poetry is often dedicated to the "private self," which often makes poetry as a form of activism a tough task. Poetry is reserved to human introspection and often more private language. However, this private nature could deem poetry as an ineffective way to start a mass political or social movement, and the author states this in a different manner. They also describe accountability (ethical representation of one's aims) and positionality (definite, thought-out politics), which are often praised by activists. However, she says that most poetry is about "generic suffering," and that this can often deem poetry irrelevant to many who call themselves political or social activists. However, I would beg to differ. This portrait of suffering makes the art universal to many different people throughout many populations who are suffering — minorities, women, the disabled, etc. The author also poses a question: Is it possible to be a political poet without advancing the work's role beyond a literary work to be read? My answer: I think that one can be a political poet and an activist without protesting in the streets or advancing their political agenda through lobbying. A literary work can spur social or legal change, as we discussed in class. Though poetry is surely a form of cultural activism at the most and probably would not be deemed "political activism," it could give others pause to look at issues, challenge the legal system, join protests or support others. I think many of Maya Angelous's poems, particularly "Still I Rise," are great examples of my above points. Here are some things that I picked out about Angelou's poem in particular: Angelou uses an introspective and personal tone in her writing. She uses the word "my" in her poetry consistently, especially when she asks questions: "Does my sassiness upset you?", "Do you want to see me broken? Bowed head and lowered eyes?", "Does my sexiness upset you?", and "You may write me down in history with your bitter, twisted lies," to name a few examples. She utilizes what the author called a "private language" in the poem. However, this poem presents the concept of universal enjoyment in art that Kant described as a characteristic of the beautiful and, thus, higher art. Though she uses a personal tone and draws from experience, Angelou highlights the experiences of various peoples and paints the portrait of "generic suffering" as a result. She explains the plight of women when she talks about how her sassiness, haughtiness and sexiness are upsetting; though she personalizes the situation in her use of language, these situations could be related to women in general, and could bring attention to issues of misogyny and sexism present throughout society. She also brings up issues of race, especially issues related to black women, in this poem, but, "still, like dust, she'll rise." This brings up the plight of a people and their history since the times of oppression in slavery, and paints a portrait of this in current times. Though poetry is not direct activism per se, it is an art form that could inspire activism, which I think is enough. Heidegger believes that the poet's task is to present a "true world" to us, or, as we've discussed in class, reveal what was once concealed. Angelou's poetry in particular definitely raises issue that are often swept under the rug, especially those related to women. I think Heidegger would say that Angelou is revealing a truth that we may have tried to ignore through language. In the portion of Heidegger's work titled "The Thinker as Poet" in our book, he writes that "being's poem, just begun, is man." Thus existing, or being, as a human is poetry and an art in and of itself in a way. I think that Angelou's poem points that out in an interesting way. Though she is trampled and kicked down, she rises like dust or the ash of a phoenix. It's almost as if what Heidegger may call "dwelling" is an art form, and this is especially evident in language or poetry. Heidegger also writes that we "do not come to thoughts; thoughts, rather come to us" (this is a loose paraphrasing). Personally, I think he may have meant that our experiences and and the world around us, or the strife between the world and earth, are responsible for the artist's or poet's thoughts. Thus, the pain we feel and the struggles we face within the world are the reason we write poetry and the reason we use words for the sake of cultural activism. Heidegger writes that "the voice of thought must be poetic because poetry is the saying of truth, the unconcealedness of all beings." Angelou's poems about the struggle of womanhood and racism are the most true "saying of truth" and the most unconcealed way to bear her heart and the thoughts that dwell within. Her works are revealing what was once concealed in line with what I would assume Heidegger would define as true art. Link to the Poetry Foundation article: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2015/08/what-is-literary-activism/ |