|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Is the artists' mission to be the actively representing the social issues of their society?
Are artists called to be politically and socially active, expressing their point on views I their work?
Or should they only limit their art to being creative and visually pleasant?
What do you think is the role of art in the second millennium?
I'm an artist. My job is to paint whatever falls out of my head. If that's political, or socially active, or visually pleasant to you, that's your thing. I just paint whatever comes to me, and leave it to the viewer to decide for themselves what it means to them.
For myself, I think my art tends not to be political overall, but I do go through brief periods where everything I do is related to what's going on in the world. If you asked my followers if my work is political, I think they would say no.
In general, art is always a reflection of society, but not all art of any era is specifically reflective of political or social views. Art is art. Sometimes it sends a message, and other times, it's just something pretty to hang on the wall. There's always room for both ways of approaching creative expression.
Thanks for sharing your point of view Lisa. I like the concept that the viewer gets to decide the meaning of the artwork depending on what speaks to him/her an political and social subjects don't need to be explicitly represented. Very interesting.
Interesting question. Leaning on my experience as a poet / artist I think it does depend. WIth the question, I kinda' got stuck with "Or should they . . . being creative and visually pleasant". BTW . . . I like surrealism a lot.
Anyway, I think off hand art is very vast and falls upon that adage of belonging to the eye of the beholder. To me, the intent of art is social as it seeks an audience. But, that does not speak to inspiration, content, and context including historical. Historical can be yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
Regard the artist's mission and social issues even simply being creative and visually pleasant may address social issues with perspective. Can we not ask if purpose may be healing social issues with a force and energy at the cosmic level? In other words, the inspiration was experiencing in some context a social issue(s) in its completeness. Perhaps the artist is inspired to record the issue openly and/or present resolve abstractly or concretely.
Let's play a little. A sea of fully grown wheat bending in a summer wind while the surrounding foothills are beneath shadows of slightly darkened clouds. There are signs they are beginning to shower as the sun sets in the distance. It is presented gracefully and with contrasting colors, but blend at the borders. Perhaps the eye of the beholder sees beauty as pleasant.
But, perhaps the inspiration was social issues. The wheat is the people bending to the forces of poverty, government, and taxes while in the distance hope fades away. Darkness is arriving with approaching political divide and social unrest.
But, what of the experience? Truly seems to belong to the eye of the beholder. But, what of artist intent. The artist, too, is a beholder. I fall back on inspiration, content, and context including historical.
What of art in this millennium? I can't wait to experience it . . .
They have the ability to express their views and feelings on matters. They are not morally obligated to do so, that is the injection of liberal politics into everything like when they try to say fiction must have the liberal message to be considered for various awards.
by Money Fairy5 years ago
When did we stop being the "United" States of America and become the "seperate ,angry, hateful "America? Don't we all still want freedom? Then why is it that a possible future president could be able...
by GA Anderson4 years ago
Lots of threads rehashing the same issues - just different wording. Lots of opinions - reasonable and fantastical and outright looney.That is what I see in threads in the Political and Social Issues forums.Here's one...
by Angela Michelle Schultz4 years ago
Does the President truly have power over social issues, or does the American's popular opinion haveDoes the President truly have power over social issues, or does the American's popular opinion have more influence?
by Mindfullthoughts6 years ago
Why do most leaders lack the guts to face some social issues?Why should all children go to school up to 18? I think they should be given the option to quit after they are 13 if they wish to with parents agreement. There...
by Jeanna4 weeks ago
Why were social issues not widely addressed in the early 2000's and earlier? I get that social media is a thing now, but the news never really would comment on issues.
by GA Anderson6 years ago
What are the top 3 Republican social issues for the 2012 election?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.