 |  Mel Chin. KNOWMAD |
All art, I think, is inherently commentary. Art is ultimately a response, a reaction, a tool -- whether it is processed-based or product-oriented. In the “Talking Politics 2008” round table discussion with contemporary artists, Adel Abidin, Laylah Ali, Mel Chin, Enrique Chagoya, Daniel Joseph Martinez, and Martha Rosler, the artists talked about both the role of politics in their art and the role art plays in politics.
When I think of political activism, I think of people making direct efforts to enact societal/political change. The emerging “social practice” art form comes to mind. This art directly interacts with the community for whom it was designed. In many cases, the community interaction or collaborative effort is, in fact, the artistic product-- the intended result. I noticed that much of the work that the artists discussed was presented political commentary critical of current events and issues versus presentations of solutions to solves these issues. There is the point that work that “bears witness” to events is effective in its engagement of society.
Artists can use their skills and training to create work that sparks this engagement. I think many of the artists presented strong arguments supporting the importance of using formal elements in politically charged artwork. Iraqi born artists, Adel Abidin put it quite frankly when he says “Work that neglects esthetics in favor of sheer politics often drives viewers away, even making them free the presentation space.” Chagoya furthers his argument, stating that “strong esthetics make stronger political content and make work more engaging” (164). Moreover, Rosler spoke on the importance of using esthetics to clarify the political/social message of the work. The ability of art to engage and communicate clearly, I believe, are the most integral and impactful elements of ‘activist art’.
That said, engaging viewers and communicating a clear message to a raise are only the first steps in creating real political change. The next step -- the active pursuing of results -- it where, I fear, many of these ‘political activists’ artists fall short. Mel Chin’s SPAWN project where he transformed a burned out Detroit house into a fisherman’s bait depot is, in my opinion, a great example of a piece that results goest all the way. As an artist, he is able to turn a destructive situation into a creative one. His art is designed not only to function as commentary on the tragedy of Detroit’s Devil’s Night, but it is also designed to positively impact the community. This is creative political problem-solving and artistic activism at its finest.
On the other hand, Chins KNOWMAD video game which uses digitalized versions of rugs handmade by marginalized indigenous groups as the obstacle courses is more flashy but has no where near the impact of SPAWN. Chin claims that by using the rugs to create richly colored and patterned worlds, the gamer will be forced to recognize and absorb these ancient patterns. What exactly does this do? Raise awareness of the often overlooked advancement of ‘primitive’ societies? Perhaps. But is doesn’t propose a solution to problem of marginalization and displacement. I am also a little skeptical about the game’s ability to truly engage the around such issues.
All that aside, maybe political activist art is more about allowing the artist to react to and reflect to upon the conflicts of their culture and their time. Many times there is little a single individual can do to even chip away at solving world conflicts. These complex conflicts, injustices, and tragedies are made a part of our day to day lives by the media, and can take a toll on the human psyche. “My art is a way to exorcise my own anxieties,” said Enrique Chagoya. “The activist role is more a byproduct.” Similarly, Ali states that her work is less about political/social commentary and critique and more about sorting through her own confusion about current issues. “It has been more interesting for me to explore in my work the things I wasn’t so clear about.”
Finally, in her post on Social Realism called ‘Metamorphoses’ Madison Pippert states that art is “amorphous.” Similarly, Mel Chin urges that “The message [of the art] must be alive and must have the capacity to grow.” It is interesting to think of art as a living entity as opposed to something static, unflinching, and unchanging.
When I think of political activism, I think of people making direct efforts to enact societal/political change. The emerging “social practice” art form comes to mind. This art directly interacts with the community for whom it was designed. In many cases, the community interaction or collaborative effort is, in fact, the artistic product-- the intended result. I noticed that much of the work that the artists discussed was presented political commentary critical of current events and issues versus presentations of solutions to solves these issues. There is the point that work that “bears witness” to events is effective in its engagement of society.
Artists can use their skills and training to create work that sparks this engagement. I think many of the artists presented strong arguments supporting the importance of using formal elements in politically charged artwork. Iraqi born artists, Adel Abidin put it quite frankly when he says “Work that neglects esthetics in favor of sheer politics often drives viewers away, even making them free the presentation space.” Chagoya furthers his argument, stating that “strong esthetics make stronger political content and make work more engaging” (164). Moreover, Rosler spoke on the importance of using esthetics to clarify the political/social message of the work. The ability of art to engage and communicate clearly, I believe, are the most integral and impactful elements of ‘activist art’.
That said, engaging viewers and communicating a clear message to a raise are only the first steps in creating real political change. The next step -- the active pursuing of results -- it where, I fear, many of these ‘political activists’ artists fall short. Mel Chin’s SPAWN project where he transformed a burned out Detroit house into a fisherman’s bait depot is, in my opinion, a great example of a piece that results goest all the way. As an artist, he is able to turn a destructive situation into a creative one. His art is designed not only to function as commentary on the tragedy of Detroit’s Devil’s Night, but it is also designed to positively impact the community. This is creative political problem-solving and artistic activism at its finest.
On the other hand, Chins KNOWMAD video game which uses digitalized versions of rugs handmade by marginalized indigenous groups as the obstacle courses is more flashy but has no where near the impact of SPAWN. Chin claims that by using the rugs to create richly colored and patterned worlds, the gamer will be forced to recognize and absorb these ancient patterns. What exactly does this do? Raise awareness of the often overlooked advancement of ‘primitive’ societies? Perhaps. But is doesn’t propose a solution to problem of marginalization and displacement. I am also a little skeptical about the game’s ability to truly engage the around such issues.
All that aside, maybe political activist art is more about allowing the artist to react to and reflect to upon the conflicts of their culture and their time. Many times there is little a single individual can do to even chip away at solving world conflicts. These complex conflicts, injustices, and tragedies are made a part of our day to day lives by the media, and can take a toll on the human psyche. “My art is a way to exorcise my own anxieties,” said Enrique Chagoya. “The activist role is more a byproduct.” Similarly, Ali states that her work is less about political/social commentary and critique and more about sorting through her own confusion about current issues. “It has been more interesting for me to explore in my work the things I wasn’t so clear about.”
Finally, in her post on Social Realism called ‘Metamorphoses’ Madison Pippert states that art is “amorphous.” Similarly, Mel Chin urges that “The message [of the art] must be alive and must have the capacity to grow.” It is interesting to think of art as a living entity as opposed to something static, unflinching, and unchanging.
