What is the responsibility of the artist?

Question

Do artists need to be actively "engaged" in the world around them, communicating, what they feel is, important content. Or, can they merely express themselves, or make "art for art's sake"?

Answer 1

As an artist, part of me wants to cringe and yell "eek!" when I read the word _responsibility_ in your question yet another part of me wants to stand up and yell "YES! Artists DO have a responsibility!"
I say "eek" because the word responsibility creates a limited working environment. One "job" of an artist is to critically analyze language and its use. Responsibility would limit the freedom of expression and create a sense of functionality about art. That would pose the question--Is art functional?
I think artists do have a responsibility to posit questions in their culture, in their environment, or in the world. They also have a responsibility to keep art going...many politicians and those "interested" in the education system want to take the arts out of the schools. They think that dabbling in paint, charcoal, pastels, music, etc. is a "waste of valuable time that could be used for other more educational purposes." So, yes, artists do have at least some responsibility to communicate what they feel is important (whatever that might be).
However, some art just IS. The art speaks for itself (sometimes in ways the artist never realized) or does not speak. Some artists never intend for their art to
communicate...they just create, set their creation aside, and move on to a new project. So, some art is just for its own sake.
I think an artist needs to have a balance of communicating with (whether for or against) ideas, events, etc. in their culture or in other cultures and of merely expressing that which wants to be expressed as some art takes on a life of its own (sometimes I draw without knowing what I am going to draw or sometimes a drawing takes a different path AS I am drawing/painting/etc. it).

Answer 2

That's a classic question without any real answer. Oscar Wilde said something about the artist not having any social obligation. But obviously there are many cases of artists using their crafts to comment on the world.

It's up to each individual artist to decide what inspires them, and what inspires them may change over time.

Answer 3

I agree, if the tattoo is just far to out there and the artist disagrees with it he should have the right of refusal. I know a shop that won't do hands, feet or necks. It's all about what the tattoo artist feels comfortable with.

Answer 4

I think an artist must dig down in themselves, even to places they may not want to face, look this in the face and use that to help them create real, connected work. Without this we would all just paint pretty ducks and stone straight lines supposed to be a metaphor for love or some dam thing.

Answer 5

yes ..
artists r very sensetive persons , they feel everyone pain .
artists r very romantic persons always searching for real love and peace all over the world.
artists hate problems and adore nothing except freedom .
artists go everywhere and like to explore every new .
they respect their work and give their best for.. when they begin a new work , as they hold the bruch or tools for sculptuing they throw everything behind their shoulder and give their best , neverminding what is the time? or how long they ve been working ? they forget everything except art.
they r married to art.
they mostly hate being employed and routine .
they r moody and like changes in life .
therefore ...they r active in the world around them.

Answer 6

They can do whatever they wont as long as that's what they say they do. It's OK to make art for art's sake as long as this is what you say you do, and not to pretend they believe something they don't. When people express themselves in art or anything,there are no rules and guidelines, so everything is acceptable.

Answer 7

is someone able to tell me what is the right answer for this question?