August 8, 2008

Art shouldn't be valued depending on propaganda it supports.

Art and media world generally stands against China – the country which organizing Olympic – symbol of peace and friendship – doesn’t respect basic human rights. The matter of ‘Tibet – China’ is treated by viewers from outside similarly like ‘Kosovo – Serbia’. It’s just comfortable to show the problem clearly, black and white.
Propaganda is the kind of incredibly strong advertisement, which uses art to its aims. Sometimes artists to make their art concepts more attractive, choose the subjects referring to this or that propaganda. But are they really creating masterpieces, because they run on proper politics?
Thinking about this question, Krasnal Bansky made the painting in the convention of Olympic propaganda, in kitsch aesthetics, pathetic and idealizing. Famous Chinese actress Zhao Wei runs with the Olympic torch. It occurs that artisticly it doesn’t stand far from works disapproving Olympics, using primitive symbols as chains, barbed wire or handcuffs. But concerning proper politics, these works are estimated as more valuable. But actually they have the same level as artworks using peace pigeons, Olympic torches or five circles.

Continuing the subject of propaganda, the times that it used its power have passed and now it can’t be as strong and influential as years ago. Besides, China passes by gigantic revolution which demands at least few dozens of years. For example western kind of legislative system was pioneered in big scale just between 70s and 80s.

Different kinds of propaganda function in politics and art, but art value actually doesn’t depend on the fact what kind of propaganda supports. Just compare the pictures attached.

No comments:

Post a Comment