Is art autonomous?

Question

Is art and music free from political, economic and social context, or are they governed by the societies which we live?

Answer 1

I agree with the historian/philosopher Foucault completely with this one. Art is the manifestation of the era and the society's status-- a reflection of the society in ideals and actualities. Artists like everyone else, cannot be completely autonomous-- sure there is some independence, but all aspects of an artists' creations are dependent on the era. Even if an artist was isolated in a underground cell, their art would be the result of an era that encourages captive artists in underground facilities. Art cannot be autonomous.

Answer 2

the answer should really be obvious... but, perhaps it isn't. It depends on what you term 'art'. Are you referring to the physical manifestation of something thought provoking or the idea itself? Art is too broad to be categorized so simply. However, I would have to say that yes, art is influenced by the world about it, and the context in which it is experienced; wouldn't a priceless gem seem the more rarefied seen on display in a hovel than a palace? For historical evidence of this argument, look at art in Nazi Germany, or communist Russia; particularly pay attention to those artists forced to flee their country after being persecuted for their art.

Answer 3

If you study much art the kind with the real balls mainly comes from society's with high or arduous government control. But understandably, once it leaves the country it loses a good deal of its meaning. Governments can never control the minds of those not willing be broken and art is the easiest outlet for fear. Every person has different view of whats happening in the world and once your art is out it no longer belongs to you but to the people it stimulates.

Answer 4

Ideally, art is autonomous – sui generis, self-justifying, pure. In practice, it can never take place in an utter vacuum, though just how much cultural context creeps in depends very much on the work of art.

Answer 5

No , nothing is autonomous in our reality but interdependent one way or another . It might appear to be autonomous but still interdependent on invisible levels of our existence. Art supply is one example, very existence of an artist must be supported externally is another example , for without support art will not even exist. Qualities of art depended on that support. Attention to art is one of a forms of support. If there is no one to enjoy it, meaning of art is a non-sense.Very existense of art depend on artists and their conditional existence. Being against of existing society and its conditional rules and regulations, does not makes artist autonomous , rather tight art in conflict with society. Both, and artist is not absent from alliance, fully existing in one knot.That is dependency.Independent art is a term with hazy applications. Autonomy would be achieved in harmonious relationship, not with dependency. So relationship and dependency is quite different quantities.

Answer 6

Both, what makes a person...is its enviornment...and mostly artist get influenced by things around them!..
but there mostly...there is a lot of social context and less of political and economical atleast in the music world...
but there are also ppl who don't care about nything and do and make wutevr they feel like...ex. something frm their dream!

Answer 7

They are not "governed" so to say, unless you live in a communist state, but they are shaped and defined by the societal influneces that the individual artist has gained in their life. So, it depends on the relevence of issues such as politics and economics in the artists life.