Forums - Politics Discussion - Art shouldn't be free of politics or "neutral"

There has been a growing trend, especially from some groups, to fight against the inclusion of political topics in movies, games, music, etc. What these people don't understand is that everything is political. Every single thing a screenwriter writes, a singer sings or a developer creates has a political background. And, as artists, these people have the political and social responsibility to do something and share their point of view. Art is a powerful tool to express and convince, and much of it has made an incredible impact in history.

When you ask for art to be “depoliticized” (whatever that's supposed to mean), you're actually just asking for the artist in question to implement political views that are more comfortable with what you believe. And when art gets stuck inside the comfort zone, society stagnates (see Middle Ages). We need politically charged art to move forward. When people consume politically charged art, they become more political and politically engaged. And that, in a democracy, should be the ultimate goal. The more politically aware the people of a country are, the more democratic the country is.

We have to stop thinking of politics as a boring thing that comes up every once in a while and start thinking of it as part of our lives. Our ancestors fought too hard for democracy for us to just say “leave politics to the politicians”.



G O O D B O I

Around the Network

Art should be what it is. I don't want people to have to censor their political messages. At the same time, I also don't want artists to HAVE to make a political statement with their art.

It should just be what it is.



You know what should be free of politics? Farts. I just hate it when someone lets fly a left-wing fart every time sex or the environment is being discussed.



Yeah, I've noticed some people saying thinks like that, and it doesn't make sense. There have been political movies and songs since forever. It's like these people completely forgot about that.

"Oh no, this punk band is being leftist now?"



CladInShadows said:
Art should be what it is. I don't want people to have to censor their political messages. At the same time, I also don't want artists to HAVE to make a political statement with their art.

It should just be what it is.

An artist making the art they want to make is already a political statement. Their responsibility is to be true to themselves and to what they believe.

Even in movements such as minimal art, where the artists tried to move away from meaning and symbolism, they're being political by negating any meaning. Negating political messages is a political statement, but it's only valid when the artist does that by their own will. When someone enforces to an artist that they can't have political messages, that's just censorship.



G O O D B O I

Around the Network

I got it.



It should be up to the artists to decide how much politics to include in their work. One thing to remember though, is that completely leaving politics out is damn hard to do as saying you want your creation to be free of politics is in itself a political statement.



I agree with everything you said, with the exception of the last part. You nailed it earlier when you said that asking for games not to be political is really just a way to make games more comfortable by asking for political views to be tailored to yours, but then say it's because politics are boring. No, I actually think a lot of the people who say that politics need to be in games are very interested in politics themselves, they just can't handle differing opinions because they think it inherently means the gaming industry is talking down to them.



Some games have no space for political statement, but mostly yes the political view of creators will show on the product.

Problem is that usually one side will ask for political freedom or condemn the political view of the art depending on what is on the game.

Just look at folks like Anita Sarkeesian, that review from Kingdoms Come Deliverance, the one from Days Gone, etc. When the political view is different than what they believe they complain about it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I agree with everything you said, with the exception of the last part. You nailed it earlier when you said that asking for games not to be political is really just a way to make games more comfortable by asking for political views to be tailored to yours, but then say it's because politics are boring. No, I actually think a lot of the people who say that politics need to be in games are very interested in politics themselves, they just can't handle differing opinions because they think it inherently means the gaming industry is talking down to them.

You're probably right. I guess I tried to fight the false argument that they use ("leave politics out of my games") instead of what they actually mean ("leave politics I don't like out of my games") in that last part.



G O O D B O I