why do artists have a social responsibility to uphold? nearly all artists create their work with a certain message they would like to bring across in their mind, be it public art or "personal art", there is an aim and a goal they want to achieve. take artists like Lucia Hartini, Han Sai Por, Ng Eng Teng, Rene Magritte for example, Lucia Hartini wants to express her fustration as a woman trapped in a society full of social expectations; Han Sai Por wants to remind us that human beings are part of nature and not apart from nature; Ng Eng Teng works are on humanity, anything to do with life, the essence of human qualities and emotions Rene Magritte tries to explore the subconscious of the human mind. such work tend to influence the viewers' interpretation of an artwork, and some works of art are quite controversial such as lyoto machida (who drank his own urine) and such artwork may offend people in one way or another. which brings me to the main point, whether or not artists should uphold social responsibility is actually dependent on what kind of art he/she is making, for example, public art or art for his/own leisure ("personal art") public art is usually comissioned by others, for example, an organisation, therefore the artist would probably be given a theme to work with. otherwise, his/her finished work will go through checks to ensure that its content is suitable for the public and whether it will benefit the organisation because if his/her work is so controversial, it would cause an uproar and there will probably be alot of critique regarding the artwork and the organisation allowing such works to be displayed in public. if the artist's work is to be displayed in public, then he/she ought to have the consideration to tone down the "controversial level" of the artwork as his/her artwork would be open to the public, where the young and old can view the artwork and it may offend and influence the public's perception of something.
as mentioned, an art work has the ability to influence and convey messages, which can carry hidden meanings and influence others. for example, Lucia Hartini uses symbolic colours, forms, subject matter to bring across her message, which leads us to think along the way she does. another artist to consider would be David Cerny of the Czech Republic. Cerny once suggested a masturbating woman as an installation to the top of a theater in France, complete with a water-shooting man that’ll occasionally douse the crowd. David prides himself on his enjoyment of making art that generates shock reactions in people. For instance, in Prague, David erected a statue of two kindly-seeming gentlemen. The men are naked, however, and every-other second their respective penis’ are reaffirmed into their individual grips as they shift from side-to-side shooting water, recognized as piss, down into the pool submerging their feet. You can even check-out a 360 degree view of the area by clicking here. David’s sculpture is cleverly entitled nothing less than, “Piss.” Enough said. (look at picture below) such artwork has caused an uproar and much displease among the public. some find such artwork offensive and it may have a negative influence on young children. hence, when placing art in public, i find that artists have a social responsibility to uphold. however, if it is not public art, then i think its a different story, which i will go on the explain what i mean.
non public art can be works in galleries, art work which artists do in their free time, without being comissioned. such art is personal and free and their is no justified rule as to how an artwork should be like. hence it is not necessarily for the artist to uphold social responsibility, in fact, the audience is given the choice as to whether or not they want to view the artwork, so it has nothing much to do with the social responsibility the artist should uphold. furthermore, if an artwork is too conservative, art will be stagnant and it is difficult for art to progress. also artworks are created to challenge public norms or to raise awareness regarding an issue. however, it is up to the viewers to decide whether or not they would want to view such artworks. it is not the artist's responsibility if the viewers feel uncomfortable with a certain artwork in a gallery, he/she should roughly know about the artist prior entering the gallery. even if he/she does not know about the artist, they are welcome to leave the gallery.
in conclusion, artists have a social responsibility to uphold when they engage in public art or display their art in public. so to debate whether artists have a social responsibility to uphold, i think it depends on where the art is placed.
edited in 2013/
i feel that there are different kinds of social responsibilities and though artists are essentially creative beings who express themselves in different ways, be it through art, dance, or writings, they should have some degree of awareness of the consequences of their work.
religiously sensitive works often always incite outrage and incur the wrath of many. Christ Ofili's 'Holy Mary' unfortunately incurred the wrath of NY mayor Rudolph Giuliani who threatened to withdraw fundings to Brooklyn Museum. This provocative work is part of 'Sensations:Young British Art in the Saatchi Collection' This painting, or mixed media i should say, is of a black woman, presumably, Ofili's portrayal of Holy Mary with a breast sticking out of her dress. the butterfly like cutouts surrounding the subject matter is supposed to mimic the angels that usually accompany such works. however, the 'angels' are replaced by cutouts of breasts, buttocks and private parts from a pornography magazine. Elephant dung is also showcased in the work and acting as a pedestal in which the title is carved onto it. Giuliani, together with other catholic groups were outraged and tried to sue Ofili. Another example is 'Piss Chirst' by Andres Serrano, whereby a crucifix with Jesus is submerged into a glistening yellow liquid which turned out to be urine. His work incurred the wrath of Jesse Halms (i really do not like this guy) who threatened to sue Serrano. Also, Marcus Harvey, who showcased a work in Saatchi's 1997 Sensations exhibition, depicting a Myra Hindley, a female child murderer, made of plaster casts of children's hands. This work resulted in a public outcry and was condemned. Harvey was faulted for trying to boost his fame by using such a controversial material for his art. This work was so outrageous that there were numerous attempts by the public to vandalize it . It is the artist's responsibility to be aware of the social repercussions that come with their world. As creative beings, im sure that they will be able to represent their ideas in another way, to reinvent and represent it such that it will not be visually offensive to people. Such works may promote wrong cultures and incite racial riots and chaos.
some works of art literally intrude the public space, bringing inconvenience and unhappiness to the general public. Richard Serra's 'Tilted Arc' is a 3.5m rosting metal structure that stands in the middle of a public square in New York. From a bird's eye view, the structure aesthetically cuts the urban living space but from a pragmatic viewpoint of the everyday citizens who live and work around that area, this structure was an eyesore. furthermore, it resulted in the citizens having to detour to get from one part of the square to the other.
however, i believe that art is an escape and hence should not be restrictive. artists, as mentioned before, are creative beings and should have the right to express their views. nevertheless, artists do need to be aware of the repercussions their works may bring, and therefore should reinvent their methods of presenting their message as what they present would eventually affect many people of different age and backgrounds in terms of their thinking and social- moral viewpoints.
in conclusion, artists have a social responsibility to uphold when they engage in public art or display their art in public. so to debate whether artists have a social responsibility to uphold, i think it depends on where the art is placed.
edited in 2013/
i feel that there are different kinds of social responsibilities and though artists are essentially creative beings who express themselves in different ways, be it through art, dance, or writings, they should have some degree of awareness of the consequences of their work.
religiously sensitive works often always incite outrage and incur the wrath of many. Christ Ofili's 'Holy Mary' unfortunately incurred the wrath of NY mayor Rudolph Giuliani who threatened to withdraw fundings to Brooklyn Museum. This provocative work is part of 'Sensations:Young British Art in the Saatchi Collection' This painting, or mixed media i should say, is of a black woman, presumably, Ofili's portrayal of Holy Mary with a breast sticking out of her dress. the butterfly like cutouts surrounding the subject matter is supposed to mimic the angels that usually accompany such works. however, the 'angels' are replaced by cutouts of breasts, buttocks and private parts from a pornography magazine. Elephant dung is also showcased in the work and acting as a pedestal in which the title is carved onto it. Giuliani, together with other catholic groups were outraged and tried to sue Ofili. Another example is 'Piss Chirst' by Andres Serrano, whereby a crucifix with Jesus is submerged into a glistening yellow liquid which turned out to be urine. His work incurred the wrath of Jesse Halms (i really do not like this guy) who threatened to sue Serrano. Also, Marcus Harvey, who showcased a work in Saatchi's 1997 Sensations exhibition, depicting a Myra Hindley, a female child murderer, made of plaster casts of children's hands. This work resulted in a public outcry and was condemned. Harvey was faulted for trying to boost his fame by using such a controversial material for his art. This work was so outrageous that there were numerous attempts by the public to vandalize it . It is the artist's responsibility to be aware of the social repercussions that come with their world. As creative beings, im sure that they will be able to represent their ideas in another way, to reinvent and represent it such that it will not be visually offensive to people. Such works may promote wrong cultures and incite racial riots and chaos.
some works of art literally intrude the public space, bringing inconvenience and unhappiness to the general public. Richard Serra's 'Tilted Arc' is a 3.5m rosting metal structure that stands in the middle of a public square in New York. From a bird's eye view, the structure aesthetically cuts the urban living space but from a pragmatic viewpoint of the everyday citizens who live and work around that area, this structure was an eyesore. furthermore, it resulted in the citizens having to detour to get from one part of the square to the other.
however, i believe that art is an escape and hence should not be restrictive. artists, as mentioned before, are creative beings and should have the right to express their views. nevertheless, artists do need to be aware of the repercussions their works may bring, and therefore should reinvent their methods of presenting their message as what they present would eventually affect many people of different age and backgrounds in terms of their thinking and social- moral viewpoints.
No comments:
Post a Comment