Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Artistic Responsibility in a Changing World

Suzi Gablik’s article “The Nature of Beauty in Contemporary Art” attempts to tackle the idea of social responsibility and how it relates to both artists and the art they create.  She explains that while the older art paradigm placed little to no responsibility on artists, a newer vision has developed in which artists feel it is their societal duty to create different types of art, which ultimately comment on the world as a whole. 

            Gablik presents two different paradigms to define the “art world”.  The first is the older, yet more traditional outlook on art.  This world is comprised of the idea that artists are defined by whether or not their art is being shown or sold.  As pointed out by Sandro Chia, this artistic world is influenced by the desire for “money, prestige, and power”, which is highly reflective upon society as a whole.  This paradigm revolves around the idea that artists are reclusive beings, who are suppose to remain sheltered and oblivious to their social surroundings, resulting in a “relief of social responsibility”. 

            The second paradigm presented in Gablik’s article is a new movement within the art world, in which artists are realizing their role with in society and the importance that they develop a sense of “artistic responsibility”. This newfound artistic responsibility has caused many artists to begin addressing societal issues and crises within their work as a way of becoming more in tune with society.  In order to do this, artist must shy away from the more traditional forms of art that hang in museums and instead choose to create a more “visible manifestation”.  This form of art can be tied to David Levi Strauss’ essay “America Beuys”, which focuses on performance artists Joseph Beuys.  While I cannot fully comprehend how Beuys’ performance of living with a coyote for three days constitutes as art, it is still an example of how an artist can choose to take a different route of expression to make a statement about society.  Strauss theorizes that Beuys’ performance “called attention to the crisis brought about by mechanistic, materialistic, and positive thinking in the West”.  Essentially, Beuys was making a social statement that humans need to be capable of adapting with a changing world. 

            Another main focus of Gablik’s article, which I personally found interesting, is the idea of beauty within art.  Some art critics argue that when art is closely connected to the world, it loses its beauty.  They feel that art should be pure and untainted by the evils of society.  I, however, agree with Gablik’s opposing view; art that “compassionately responds” to whatever it is referring to makes the world more beautiful.  I feel that this idea is closely connected to the emotional response one feels towards art, and as long as art creates some type of emotion, whether it be a positive or negative, it is beautiful.

      In a conversation with Thomas Moore, Gablik ultimately concludes that placing the term “responsibility” upon artists gives it a negative connotation.  Artist should not have to feel pressure to create art that critiques society, however, art should “celebrate and participate robustly in the life-world”.  I particularly like Gablik’s use of the word celebrate.  By viewing art as a celebration of life, society, and the world, it takes away some of the pressure of the world responsibility.  While artists such as Beuys might not have been celebrating life, he was definitely using the newer paradigm to comment on his surroundings and to me art that it is socially aware and compassionate is exactly what this world needs to get people to stop and think.  


By Hildy

No comments:

Post a Comment