About Me
My research project focuses on the concept of the artist as social commentator as it relates to contemporary French art and culture. I highlight the various connections this theme has to art history, Western art, and art recently shown in this year's Biennale in Venice. based on research and the experiences I had while studying abroad in Paris for a month and a half.
The artist's role as social commentator has to do with the notion of what it means to make art. In the history of modern art there have been many movements to do with aesthetics, technical skill, or color theory.
The Situationist movement that began in France in 1957, had to do with critical theory regarding art, philosophy, and a range of other disciplines. In its early days, it was a group that disregarded any art made separate from politics and current events, thus redefining the way they saw art and the role of the artist. No longer was it enough to create an image that gave the illusion of reality, or an image to perform religious practices with, nor even the simple documentation of history. Now, art had to have a purpose and it had to say something about its topic, whatever it may be.
This movement marked by such political-artistic discourse is important as artists still use this approach today. There is sometimes a feeling among artists that 'it's all been done before'. The role as social commentator resolves this problem in that it is always adaptable and can be molded to fit any time period. Art that makes a statement is timeless. In my paper, I will explore the way in which art can be used as a tool for contemporary social justice and political discourse, based on work I encountered during my research trip to France and Italy.
Early art was often solely used for religious ritual or visual representations that served as education for the illiterate and often uneducated masses. For example, Christian imagery at the entrance of many churches often served as reminders to those who came of a Judgement Day, which offered incentive not to commit sins. As art evolved, it became a tool for documentation and propaganda. For example, many royals had not only their portraits done, but would have an artist paint a ceremony or coronation that took place. These pieces served to document the event in history, but also to show the royals’ amount of riches and luxury, and signs of authority and power. Propaganda art gave way to social commentary art in that it simply shifted the focus from persuading the viewer with an image, to moving the viewer to think more deeply on the image.
When speaking of art in the present or past, the importance of context cannot be stressed enough. Art is nonexistent without the culture and society in which it was made. The context Paris has is it’s illustrious history for providing some of the most inspirational context for artists. Throughout history, and particularly in the modern age, artists have flocked to Paris like moths to a flame, seeking inspiration from the rich cultural life of the city.
To go to Paris was to commit to immersing oneself in a community of art and artists. In my own travels, I did experience a great deal of art, however something was missing. In Paris, there are many spaces for art but the majority of these spaces are reserved for art from the past. There is a heavy focus on preserving art from the past, which is not a negative thing, however it forces one to critically observe and notice the limited spaces available for contemporary art and artists working today. Does this mean that we are seeing a shift in the value of Paris’ role as muse for the artist? Paris is taking a new direction, transitioning from muse to curator. This can be seen as a positive thing in that it provides more space for global influences and works to grow; allowing also for contemporary art to move away from any one geographical sphere of influence having an overwhelming presence.
The Art Biennale of Venice has historically shown art from current artists who represent their country as they create something that relates to the overarching theme of the year. This year’s Biennale theme was “All the World’s Futures.” Between the sheer amount of artists involved in this show, interpretations of the theme were extremely varied. However, most artists did take a more political approach. The Serbian Pavillion showcased the flags of ‘dead nations’ mangled and dirtied on the floor of the gallery. The flags represented nations that no longer existed because of war, shifting boundaries, or other causes. The German artists have also used flags to make a statement; by hanging their own flag with the word ‘Germoney’ painted over it.
The Belgian Pavilion titled their works “Personne Et Les Autres” which translates to “Person and Other.” This pavilion directly references the Situationist Movement through it’s title, which is borrowed from a writer who was deeply involved with the Situationist Internationals. The works shown here are a product and timeline of history as it relates to colonial entanglements; showcasing artists from Africa especially because of their closely intertwined past with colonialism. Australia’s pavilion also dealt with time with their exhibition titled, “Wrong Way Time.” The works included appear random at first but once one walks through and explores each piece in relation to those surrounding it, it becomes much more clear what the intentions of the artists were. The works connect to central themes concerning global conflicts, world finances, and the environment. However politically charged these topics are, they are presented in ways that create a personal atmosphere. Viewers see familiarity in the objects since they are things one would see in everyday life, as well as in the words. Although they read as ramblings at first, they begin to read as thoughts anyone could have, such as concerns over nuclear weapons.
This personal- political relationship is another major concept that draws back to the artistic-political. It can be argued that anything artistic can be seen as personal, since a person creates art from their own personal ideas and thought processes. The same can be said for political matters, especially since politics is inherently tied to people and their lives. Because of this, I felt the need to have a personal, artistic, and political aspect of my own in this project. Through journaling, personal note-taking, and analytical papers, I began to work through my own role as artist and social commentator. A theme that kept appearing was the way art evolves and recycles itself. I found it interesting to note that ideas in art seem to come up again and again, with every new generation feeling that “out with the old, in with the new” cliche. There has been much debate for example, over The Selfie. Criticism over this modern tool is intriguing for many reasons, namely though because of the fact that throughout history portraiture and self-portraiture has been regarded as a formal art and rarely questioned. It is hung up in galleries and museums right next to landscapes and still-lifes alike. Selfies are really just another form of portraiture, and the fact that it’s accessible to anyone with a cameraphone or camera, doesn’t take away it’s potential to be artistic. It can also be compared to the invention and consequent quick availability of the videocamera. It was seen as a new medium and as such, artists began to toy around with film in a variety of ways. In response to this argument for Selfies, I began to develop a series project including images that toy and playfully critique the rejection and renunciation of Selfies. Images would depict people posing in front of art in respected museums and galleries, mimicking the pose used in the original work. Thereby showing a direct contrast and creating a discussion between what we consider to be High art or not. High art has historically been considered art that is valued academically and by members of the upper class. It is also often defined by what it is not. For instance, arts associated with domesticity such as crafting, sewing, and yarn-work, are not considered High art. Art that requires little skill or appears to require little skill is also frequently questioned. There is a certain level of difficulty, but also sophistication expected from High art and generally a high level of wealth surrounding it, whether it be cost to make or sell. These set of standards seek to raise the value of art by comparatively devaluing other art. This is problematic and actually works against artists by limiting art to something for the consumption of only the privileged elite, instead of for everyone.