Art is always political, discuss

Art as a political communicative tool
INTRODUCTION
In 2004, the New York Foundation for the arts conducted a vote asking people about their thoughts regarding political arts. According to the vote, 69 percent of individuals responded that "political art is boring", and 4 percent of individuals thought that "politics should be kept out of art" among 3000 people. While this result shows that the majority of people are aware of the relationship of politics and art, this also indicates that the majority of people are differentiating political art from ordinary art. As Ó Croidheáin (2010) points out, views of people who see the relationship between art are varied from the idea that art is always political to the idea that only direct political affiliation makes art political. While the former argument is that art can be interpreted in many ways, latter argues that art should be appreciated only as artists intended to. Because of this reason, people who argue there is a category for political art sometimes criticise political artists as activists.
For example, Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, who was arrested by the Chinese government for his activists' behaviour, is often accused as an activist. However, Ai Weiwei denies that he is an activist and asserts that he is only an artist. He argues that 'art is the liberation of the mind' and 'all art has its own message'(Zamyn, 2009). He sees art as a communication tool between artists and audiences. He criticises the world by putting his messages in his artwork, and let audiences appreciate it. According to his assertion, artists imply some meaning in the artworks. By doing that, artists give art its own meaning and power.
To debate whether art is always political or not, the definition of the term "political" should be preceded. People perceive the term "political" in a different way. Some people understand the term "political" as a direct political affiliation. For them, the political artwork has a boundary that involve direct political messages, so that they believe that only a few artworks including propaganda, government art is political. They assert that art does not have to be political, and art can be appreciated itself when it does not contain any political messages. On the other hand, others perceive the term "political" in a broad sense. As Aristotle once said that "all human being are political", they believe that every social interaction and elements are political. In this sense, "political" does not only mean direct political affiliation, but "any discussion of, or any thinking about, relationships of power between people" (Berlatsky, 2015). According to this argument, art is always political because people find the power relations in artworks.
This gap of perception causes the debate of whether art is political or not. However, the term "political" is needed to define in a broad sense, which includes power relations in every interaction of society. As one of the human activities, and communication tool, art itself generates the power relations between artist and audiences. By expressing their opinion and giving the meaning in art, the artist gives art the power. On the other hand, as a receiver, audiences are introduced to the artists' ideology and the world. This happens even when an artist aims for apolitical artworks. Art has its power to mobilise audiences and refine the world. In this essay, I argue that art is always political. By defining the term "political" first, and by exploring and interpreting some art politically, I would like to demonstrate that art is always political; nevertheless the artists did not intend to have any political messages in artworks.

THE DEFINITION OF "POLITICAL"
To discuss whether art is political or not, it is important to define what "political" means. As a contested concept, there are several definitions of it. As a narrow term, "political" refers to the act primarily associated with the government and the state. In this case, an only direct affiliation of politics is political, so that political art is narrowed down as propaganda, government posters, or arts that are sponsored by the states. This definition has very restrictive boundaries so that it "restricts who is political and who can engage in politics" (Bambra et al.:2003). Also, this is a 'top-down' approach which separates politics from other social activities.
On the other hand, in a broad sense, "political" contains every act in our daily life. According to this definition, politics is "power-structured relationship or arrangement whereby one group of person is controlled by another" (Millett, 1969). Contrary to the former definition, this is a 'bottom-up' approach to the definition of "political", thus, everyone in the society engages in a political act.
However, the narrow definition of the term "political" is only a definition of dictionary. In a political science, scholars adopt the latter definition, and define the term "political" in a broad meaning. Human beings are born as a political being and identify themselves in the society by interacting with others. According to Foucault, "political thinking is focused on the concept of power relations" (Sluga, 2011:69). Every relation that we can find among people is based on the power relations, and these make every element in the society political.
Art for art's sake
People who argue that art is not always political believe that the term of "political" should be used in a restricted area, where there is a direct political affiliation such as government or the states. They understand the term "political" as a definition of dictionary. They often differentiate pure art from political art, and they assert that art should be understood as art itself. They believe "art world" exists itself, "with separate cultural spaces, communities, and languages" (Lambert, 2012), and artworks should be appreciated within the original intention of artists. In other words, people who assert that art should not be political "often seem to view politics in relatively narrow terms" (Berlatsky, 2015). People who support that art should have remained as art often see the politicisation of art as corruption. However, progressive theorists criticise artists who aim apolitical work as artists "who see that as a failure to challenge the dominant political discourse, or even worse" (Ulko, 2013). Winegar (2006) asserts that artist can draw a utopia through the art project, and it is political if artists do not fight for art's complete autonomy from political, economic, or social power. The movement of artists who wanted to keep their art as art itself was spread in the early nineteenth century. Artists argued that their art does not need moral or social justification. However, they overlook three things in their argument.
First of all, artists' that want audiences to see their work as apolitical is political itself. In other words, by pursuing art qua art, art becomes political. To pursue art qua art, art attempts to deny pre-dominations of any other forms. But paradoxically, this act itself is the political act. Since political act contains every power relations among people, artists who impose their opinion to audiences are political. As George Orwell once said that "the opinion that art should not be political is itself a political opinion". In other words, every choice and idea in our daily life is political. And in this sense, art can never be independent of the politics.
In addition, people who argue that art is not always political overlook that art requires interpretation. This interpretation does not have to be always as an artist's intention. Even though artists do not want any political meaning in their artworks, audiences have their free will to interpret artworks in their favor. Audiences, who are political beings, raise questions from the artworks. Audiences appreciate artworks within its social context, which contains politics, culture, and society values. By picking up the elements and details that draw audiences deeper, audiences regenerate the meaning of artworks, and accept the meaning politically.
Thirdly, they overlook that art is a communicative tool between people. Art exists in a social context and every art has its audiences. When creating an artwork, artists consider its audiences and the message to deliver. As a medium, artwork connects artist and audience, and they exchange the meaning of artworks. This generates the discussion of power between people, which makes art as political. According to Berlatsky (2015), "art and politics, aesthetics and power, exist in the same spaces; they are both social".
In conclusion, Art and politics are bonded in each other and sometimes use each other for its own sake. While all human activities are political, artist and audiences exchange the meaning of it through artworks. In other words, as a communicative tool, art works politically among people.
THE POLITICAL NATURE OF ART
Like all other elements of human life, power is exercised over art by imposing artists' opinion in a context of social, economic, and political system. Art is political in many ways:
Art is political because, it is dominated by some social groups and often subordinated by government or the states.

Art is political because it reflects the time period of the society, and imposes the meaning to the audiences. Art as a medium, audiences connect themselves to the art world, build, reproduce, and refine the meaning of art.

Art is political because it shapes a social value. Art is a great tool for recruitment, and art creates solidarity within the society. It enables people to share and shape social value.

Art and power domination
Art and politics have coexisted from the beginning of human history, and art has been subordinated by politics for a long time. The masterpieces that we see in these days are often created by the request of the states or the rich people. The government and the state used art to manipulate its citizens, and artists have often belonged to the states. However, this is not exceptional for artworks that were not subordinated by the states or government. As a tool for expression, art contains artist's opinion and thoughts toward the world. As a political being, human beings communicate each other within society through speech, and expression and these make them political. By accepting and appreciating art, audiences are imposed to artist's ideology and thoughts. In other words, art is always political whether it is subordinated by political power or not.
Art that reflects the time period of the society
Art is political because art reflects the time period of the society. It often reflects the time the artwork was done, but sometimes it also is interpreted by the time audiences' get the artwork. By considering the politics and society of the time period, interpretation makes art political. According to Rose (2012), art can reveal important aspects of social context and cultures by expressing the values of a given culture or social class. Relatively to other forms of art, this is usually clear in poems. Because poets use a metaphor to deliver the message, poems can often be translated in multiple ways.
Until the day I die, I long to have no speck of shame when I gaze up toward heaven,/ so I have tormented myself, even when the wind stirs the leaves./ With a heart that sings the starts, I will love all dying things./ And I will walk the way that has been given to me.// Tonight, again, the wind brushes the stars.
Yun Dong-Ju, "Prologue"


For example, the above poem was written in 1941 by Korean poet Yun Dong-Ju. Without referring to the time period it was written, this poem itself appears as a self-reflective poem. The author does not have any direct political affiliation in his poem. However, by considering the political and social situation of the time period, the poem can be interpreted as a political message. At the time period when this poem was written, Korea was under the domination of Japan. By considering this fact, readers can figure out what the author wanted to say in the poem. In other words, the poem can be interpreted in various ways regardless of the author's intention, and political interpretation can be one form of it.
Another example of this is Khaled Hosseini (2003) 's novel. As an Afghanistan American author, he writes his novel based on the war in Afghanistan. One of his novels, "the Kite runner", is a growth novel during the wartime in Afghanistan. However, even though the background of the novel is during the wartime, the author does not affiliate any political messages directly. Because of this, most of the readers find the novel as a well-written growth novel, and this does not cause any repulsion. Nevertheless, the wartime of Afghanistan and its political situations are often not the main focus but are very much prevalent throughout the novel makes it very political indeed. As some arts demand non-artistic knowledge to understand the meaning of arts, the novel requires audiences to link artworks with the situation of the time period of Afghanistan. By linking artworks with their own situation or the time period that artworks reflect, readers can read the political situations, and authors' political messages. According to Griselda Pollock (1988), the world is built, reproduced, and redefined through the social practices, and art is one of them. Like this, through art, people connect artistic thoughts with political activity.
However, this political interpretation happens even in apolitical artworks. By exemplifying Harry Potter, Berlatsky (2015) argues that all art is political thus art is always political. According to him, "Harry Potter imagines the world in which certain powerful people know about dangers which they must keep secret from everyone else" (Berlatsky, 2015). Even though it does not contain the realpolitik in itself, this has "particular take on power and its relationship to secrecy" (Berlatsky, 2015). In other words, politics does not have to mean direct political message, but it can be any relationships of power among people.
Art and social value
Art is political, because art is one of the accessible ways of shaping the social values. As one of the most powerful and accessible ways of shaping social consciousness (Okail, 2014), art "has the capacity to trigger reflection, generate empathy, create dialogue and foster new ideas and relationships and offers a powerful and democratic way of expressing, sharing and shaping values"(Common cause, 2013). As a social form of human behaviour, art enables us to "understand how to imagine and rehearse a different way of being and relating" (Common cause, 2013). Art is the frame that people use to understand the world, and construct the idea. By shaping the world and value people share in the society, artworks politically.
ART THAT REFLECTS POLITICS
While some art is clearly associated with the political value, it is hard to find political messages in some art. While this enables people to approach the artworks easily, it makes it hard to understand the artist's intention. Art is political, and audiences impose political value during interpretation. And sometimes the political meanings of the specific artworks change by the audience's situation or the time period. As an artwork that has clear political meaning and purpose, graffiti in Palestine is a good example. Graffiti in Palestine is famous for its clear message toward Israel and international society, and many artists are involved in the work and resisting toward Israel. On the other hand, poems are relatively hard to find political meaning inside. By using a metaphor, poets make it possible for readers to interpret it in several ways.
Graffiti and politics
The modern form of graffiti, which started in the late 1960s in New York, evolved into a complex art form which often resist to the dominant power. Compare to other artworks, graffiti contains direct political messages in it and targets all the citizens as its audiences. The good example of graffiti with the political message is the one on Palestine wall. The Wall surrounding Palestinian territories are over 700 kilometers, and it isolates Palestine from the World. Since Israel constructed the wall between Israel and Palestine, street artists gathered together and started painting on the wall. The artwork is still ongoing, and artists spray on the wall about Israel's oppression and cruelty. Artists aim to transmit political messages to the next generation. By painting on the wall, artists can approach broad audiences efficiently. Even though some people raise a doubt if the graffiti cannot be more or less than art, artists and its supporter believe that graffiti can work mightier than the violent resistance toward Israel. In Palestine, graffiti is used to provoke emotions among its people and resistance to the Israeli regime. By accusing Israel as an oppressor, the wall has become a tremendous petition, political thread, and an entreaty for humanity. Furthermore, artists assert that this visual symbol can mobilise people to resist Israel. The characteristic of graffiti on the Palestinian wall is that it is easy to understand and perceive the political meaning of it. As artists target the general public as its audiences, and as artists show their purpose of art clearly, graffiti becomes the safest and most efficient way to reach a broad audience.
Poems and politics
Whilst graffiti has its clear purpose and meaning of political, poems are often hiding its political value by using metaphors. Mahmoud Darwish is a Palestinian poet who is considered as the most important contemporary artist. As a political activist, the author wrote several poems that criticise Israel. Some poems of his involve direct political messages, but some poems are taking a form of a love poem and hard to find its meaning without knowing the situation.
O man, May God cure your soul./ Why don't you try the taste of love/ Why don't you make way for the sun!
-Mahmoud Darwish,"Dialogue with a Man who Hates Me"



As above, it is hard to interpret the poem politically without knowing the political situation in Palestine. But once it is referred with a political situation in Palestine, it is able to find that the author "criticises the Israeli and sympathises with him at the same time" (Neisser, 2000). In the poem, he is accusing Israelis of war and conflict. The one who is blocking the sun and causing darkened lives of the Palestinians are Israelis. Yet he shows the sympathy toward Israelis by asking "Why don't you try the taste of love". He believes that happiness is possible if one pauses to "taste love". By poems, the poet tried to communicate with Palestinians and also Israelis.
Often, a poet makes it vague to interpret the poem to avoid censorship. In this case, audiences involve the personal life of a poet when interpreting the poem. Below is the poem of a Korean poet, Yong-un Han which speaks about his lover who left him.
You have gone. Ah, you have gone, my beloved./ Gone without a parting glance – along the narrow path through the maple grove, tearing the blue mountain haze./ Our old vows, once firm and radiant as golden flowers, have turned to cold dust and gone wafted by a sighing breeze.
Han Yong-un, "The Silence Of Love"


By using the metaphor, the author hid what he actually wants to say through his artwork. This lets audiences transmit their situation, or poet's personal life during interpretation. As a poet who lived under the Japanese domination era, the author is famous for his active resistance toward Japan. But, without the information of his personal life, it is hard for audiences to derive the political meaning from the poem. Indeed, he took an advantage of this, by interpreting love as Buddhism, or his actual lover, he could avoid the censorship of Japan. Even though there is still dispute whether his work is political or not, it shows how artwork can always be political regardless of the poet's intention.

CAN ART AFFECT POLITICAL SITUATION?
Even though much aware of the relationship of art and politics, and admits that art can be political, there is still a dispute if art can affect to political situations. Some artists believe that "art is useless as a tool for political change (Slackman, 2006)". A Syrian actor, Duraid Lahham argues that often the men in power played his critical artworks by pointing out "freedom of criticism". He argues that he criticised the government through his play, but it could not provoke any changes in civil society. Likewise, in the case of graffiti, many Palestinians raise its doubts over it. Banksy recalls his conversation with an old man he met in Palestine (Parry, 2011). The old man was not happy about Banksy's work on the wall. By criticising Banksy's artwork, the old man insisted that the wall should have remained as itself, because Banksy is beautifying the wall. He worried about worsening the situation by making children think that the wall is beautiful.
The Palestinian poet Darwish could not avoid criticism either, even though he affected other writers as well as readers. Despite the fact that the poems contributed in shaping Palestinian identity, and further building its solidarity toward Israel, many Arabs criticised Darwish's poems because it often showed humanity toward Israel. In addition, Munir Akash, editor of The Adam of Two Edens (2001), criticises the author's poem was not successful in delivering political messages. He asserts that the author's "celebrity was ahead of his poetry" (Jaggi, 2002). However, even though art fails to affect politics in a direct way, it does not mean that art does not function politically at all. Art affects politics by:
bringing international eyes on the issue, and;

producing knowledge and solidarity.

Nevertheless, of people who criticised graffiti for its beautifying of the wall, graffiti succeeded to bring international eyes on the Palestinian and Israeli issue. Many artists from all over the world came to Palestine to paint the wall, and they felt sympathy with the Palestinian situation. Darwish's poem as well, contributed to shaping Palestinian identity. Because it was written in non-political words, it could also be spread all over the Arab world, and international world.
In addition, Eyerman (2013) argues that art provokes political protest, "some of them aimed at producing knowledge and solidarity within the group of protesters and others as a means of communicating to those outside what the protest is all about" (Eyerman, 2013). According to him, art serves as a great tool that recruits supporters and it has been used to transmit political ideology. Arts are important in a sense of a communicating tool, and art articulates the political ideologies.
To sum up, artworks might have limitations to provoke big political change. Surely, the function of art as political tools is challenged by the dominant power and further changes in the world. But it does not mean that art can not affect politics at all. By transmitting political value in artwork, or by interpreted politically, art affects people's perception about politics. Art is rich in information, and it is important as a mean of political expression. In other words, even though art cannot provoke the direct involvement in politics, it can build and construct people's political ideology, and call for justice silently.

CONCLUSION
Once and for all, the debate of art's political attribution is originated from the different perception of the term "political". While some people understand the meaning of "political" as a direct affiliation of politics, this is only a restricted definition of a dictionary. In political science, scholars such as Weber define politics as competition for power (1991:78). Politics is based on power distribution, and everything that shares, distributes, transfer power. This can be found in any sphere of the world, thus, makes all elements in the world political. While the narrow definition of the term "political" restricts the meaning of politics, and understands that politics and art can exist separately, scholars of political sciences understand politics as an essential element in our daily life. In this sense, "political" does not only mean the direct political affiliation, but also the relationships of power between people which can be found in a daily basis. Thus, politics can be found in every power relations in the society, also, it can be found in art.
Once, Winegar(2006) said that art is political unless artists do not fight for art's complete autonomy from other social element such as politics or economy. In fact, many artists argued to be apolitical, and be independent from the states and capital. However, paradoxically, the fight for art's autonomy is political act itself. By saying that they do not want people see their artworks in a political way, artists impose political message in their artwork: I do not want my artworks to be seen as political. Imposing meaning in the artwork is the political act, thus, all art is political. In other words, by fighting for art's autonomy, art becomes political one more time.
Art and politics always coexisted, and the relationship is ever intimate in the contemporary world. According to Groys, "art is as much a force in the power play of global politics today as it once was in the arena of cold war politics" (Groys, 2008). As a political being, all the activities of the human being make humans political. "Political" does not have to affiliate direct meaning; rather it can be defined as something that can be found in anywhere. Also, art always reflects its time period of the society that it was created, or it was interpreted. As seen above, art is interpreted considering the social context, including politics, cultures, and economy. Artists' political intention does not decide whether the artwork is political or not. Because artwork is interactive between artist and audiences, interpretation takes an important role in the artwork. By making the audience to involve in the process, audiences raise questions and reproduce the meaning of art. Furthermore, art articulates social value. By communicating with audiences through art, artists impose a certain meaning in art, and it enables people to understand the world.
While art that contains direct political messages sometimes bothers audiences, most of art makes it easy to approach by not containing any direct political messages. But this does not mean that art is not political, thus audiences should have a critical attitude when appreciating artworks. Art can be interpreted in many ways, in addition to an artist's intention. By looking at the time period, and social context, art can transmit powerful messages among people. As a communicative tool, art transmits the society's value and provide a frame to look at the world.
What this all adds up to is an involvement and challenge of actors -- artists and audiences. While art does not tell people what to think. Rather, art "provides us with one of the few remaining playgrounds" (Stone, 2014) to think, where people can actively involve in. Sometimes, art leads people to be aware of unfamiliar conditions, by morally striking artistic activities. By making people question the society they live in, artists challenge the mainstream in the society. As developing technology and science challenges the way of thinking, "artist should always be the first to become aware of the change that arises and the boundaries that it destroys" (Zamyn, 2009).












Reference
Baldacchin, John. (2012) Art's Way Out. Rotterdam, Netherland: Sense Publishers.
Bambra, C. et al. (2003) "Towards a politics of health". Health Promotion International, Vol. 20 No. 2 187-193
Berlatsky, Noah. (6 April 2015) "Is all art political?" Ravishly (accessed 30 December 2015),
Bowen, Rob. (18 August 2009) "What makes Art, Art? Perception, interpretation, or something more?" Fuel your creativity (accessed 16 December 2015),
Common Cause. ( September 2, 2013) "The Art of Life: how arts and culture affect our values" Values and Frames (accessed 28 December 2015),
Darwish, Mahmoud. (1967) Dialogue with a Man who Hates Me
Eyerman, Ron (3 June 2013) "The Role of the Arts in Political Protest" Mobilising ideas (accessed 20 December 2015),
Groys, Boris. (2008) Art power. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Han, Yong-un. (1926) The silence of my beloved, Translated by Sammy Solberg (1971)
Hosseini, Khaled. (2003) The Kite runner, New York, US: Riverhead Books
Jaggi,Maya. "Poet of the Arab world" The Guardian, 8 June 2002.
Lambert, Steve (20 Oct 2012), "An Open Letter to Critics Writing about Political Art" Artistic Activism (accessed 23 December 2015),
Millett, Kate. (1969) Sexual politics, Illinois, US: University of Illinois Press
Neisser,Yvette. (2000) "The Dialogue of Poetry: Palestinian mid Israeli Poets Writing Through Conflict and Peace" The Search for Regional Cooporation, Palestine-Israel Journal, Vol. 7 Nos 1&2
Ó Croidheáin, Caoimhghin. (10 July 2010) "Political Art". Global Research (accessed 29 December 2015),
Okail, Nancy. (31 Oct 2014) "Art as political expression" The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy (accessed 30 December 2015)
Parry, William. (2011) Against the Wall : The Art of Resistance in Palestine. Chicago, IL, USA: Lawrence Hill Books.
Pollock, Griselda. (1988) Vision and Difference: Femininity, Feminism and Histories of Art, New York, US: Paperback
Rose, Barbara. (November 2012) "The Politics of Art", Brooklyn Rail (accessed 29 December 2015),
Royseng, Sigrid. (2010) "Review Essay, Pierre Bourdieu, The Field of cultural production: essays on art and literature". International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 16, No.1, 68-69.
Slackman, Michael. "An Arab Artist says All the World Really Isn't a stage". The New York Times, 19 August, 2006
Sluga, Hans. (2011) "'Could you define the sense you give the word "political"'? Michel Foucault as a political philosopher" History of the Human Sciences Vol. 24 No. 4 69–79
Stone, Dickon "Art for your sake". The European Magazine, 29 May, 2014
Ulko, Alex. (28 June 2013) "NAS why? or can art be apolitical?" New eurasia, (accessed 2 Jan 2016)
Weber, Max., and Gerth, Hans. (1991) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, New York, US: Routledge
Winegar, Jessica. (2006) Creative Reckonings, Stanford, California, Stanford University
Yun, Dong – Ju. (1948) Prologue, Translated by Chae-Pyong Song and Darcy Brandel (accessed 2 Jan 2016)
http://www.zamyn.org/commissions/art-is-always-political.html (accessed 28 December 2015)