The Art of Politics

Tucson, Arizona
November 27, 2012 12:03am CST
Join me, mylotters, in viewing the artwork of a rather well known artist-- the painting linked here is on display, at the moment, at Bunker Hill Community College in my home town, Boston-- the birthplace of the Revolution. The city where the Declaration was first read. Home of the Sons of Liberty. Where it all began, so to speak. You might want to look at all the paintings in this very well done slide show, I would be interested in your comments on them. They are very well executed, and well displayed--and thought provoking, shall we say. They are also being considered as curriculum additions for public schools' art appreciation programs, as some of his other works have been used before, so your kids can appreciate them as well. artandresponse.com/paintings/the-truth.html Sorry if you have to copy and paste the link-- I have issues with that. By the way, this work was originally to be displayed in New York, in 2008-- but was pulled from the exhibition due to public outrage-- and the artist feels his 1st Amendment rights were being infringed upon. I contend that is not the case-- he was not TOLD to take the painting out, he CHOSE to do so, after people disapproved. So much for standing up for your beliefs and rights.
2 people like this
3 responses
@mensab (4208)
• Philippines
27 Nov 12
politics is always contentious. and the interpretation and appreciation of art are varied from positive to negative. two of the controversial fields together would always elicit provocative and confrontational feedbacks from the public especially those of differing views and opinions. i'd like to see art insulated and detached from politics, because art has liberating aspect; and politics is somehow constricting in my view.
• Tucson, Arizona
27 Nov 12
So would I--that was a point I was hoping someone would make in this discussion. The art itself is very well done, the man has talent. I would like to see him focus his talent in a different direction, personally. Such a gift should be used to its fullest potential, not used to impose personal viewpoints and ideologies on the viewers of the art. The highest art, in my view, is removed from political and ideological prejudices, and reflects more on the nature of the world, than on the nature of Man in many ways. Out of curiosity, which painting did you favor, if any?
@allknowing (61550)
• India
27 Nov 12
You both have put it succinctly. But a cartoonist on the other hand has every right to exaggerate an issue no matter what the subject is. We have had R.K. Laxman doing a splendid job of that. http://www.mapsofindia.com/who-is-who/news-media/r-k-laxman.html
1 person likes this
• Tucson, Arizona
27 Nov 12
Yes, I am all in favor of cartoonists, lampoonists and things like that as well, as a matter of fact. We need more good ones. I just prefer that art, of the painting kind, stay more removed from issues of the day. This artist has talent, and I'd like to see what else he could do with it.I found the paintings themselves visually pleasing, but the overt messages in them removed the enjoyment of the art for me, which is sad, since I love art.
@dragon54u (31609)
• United States
27 Nov 12
Those are very provocative. I was enjoying them until it automatically launched into a slide show and I lost control of my viewing. A lot of these take a few minutes to absorb! It's hard to tell what the artist is trying to say and I guess that's the point--you're supposed to deal with your own agenda. I found the one with the "golden microphone" very disturbing, though, even more than the ones depicting the prez as the Messiah. The first one I saw was of Obama with a crown of thorns, which reminded me of Jamie Foxx calling him "our lord and savior" last weekend. Weird.
@dragon54u (31609)
• United States
27 Nov 12
Oh, so that's the one he removed, Obama with the crown of thorns? Funny, Jamie Foxx made a remark last weekend at an event--"It feels like a church in here. Let's give praise to God and honor Obama, our Lord and Savior!" I think that's nearly word for word, I read it this morning. This artist's work seems akin to that statement.
• Tucson, Arizona
28 Nov 12
As a matter of fact, I had read that, out and about--and then ran into this while looking for something else. I found the whole thing really amazing--"our Lord and Savior"...Seriously?? Well, if he was joking, the cheering crowds didn't realize it (and neither did Obama, apparently, since he didn't contradict it, or refer to it as a good joke--I would have). Yes, that's the one he removed, and is whining about having removed. I would have left it in, myself--part of mt believe that if you make something or say something, or do something, you should stand by it.But apparently some people think differently about their work, whatever it may be. It doesn't surprise me that they have it up in the show at BHCC--those guys tend to be a little bit...outspoken? confrontational? Avant Garde? Radical hotheads? I just wish they would put the whole exhibit for view online-- I would like to see which way the exhibit, as a whole, is slanted. Art exhibits can be very biased, and judging from this painting, I'd say this one probably is.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
30 Nov 12
I find it ironic that 'offense' can be taken, I mean...when it is Christians or conservatives being offended, who cares? Right? I find Glenn Beck's take on this interesting... http://artandresponse.com/index.html
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
30 Nov 12
But aren't ALL fringe groups given the SAME rights as anyone else? Think about the NAMBLA group, THEY get ACLU help. So why do CHRISTIANS have to distance themselves from those sub groups that make the rest of the world uncomfortable?
• Tucson, Arizona
4 Dec 12
The difference in one of quality, not quantity. The ACLU has a long record of defending the rights of nutballs--and the nutballs use that to try to become more "mainstream". A nutball group has finally arrived, so to speak, when the ACLU won't help them anymore. Nutballs tend to fight a lot harder to keep the boundaries they have, and expand those boundaries, then Christians do--though I don't see why. You can bet if Obamacare was discriminating against the gays, or illegal Hispanics, or even the Jews--a lot more people would be screaming. The Anti-Defamation League jumps on every tiny incidence of antisemitism they can find (and with reason). The Christians should jump a lot louder and more often than they do. In theory, all groups have the same rights. In practice, you know as well as I, that isn't the case. It only becomes the case when people start screaming, loudly.