The Harsh Responsibility of the Artist

Should artists be held responsible for the way their works are interpreted and internalized by the public and philosophers alike, and in turn, change their forms of expression for the betterment of the public? Artists sway and round out the aesthetic preferences of society and provide an outlet of expression that is not available in other forms, and while this fact does not make them culpable for the possible actions of others that may have been derived from their works, it does make the artist responsible for the feelings they have instilled in the people. As an element of artistic expression, any media is inherently created to drive emotion, perspective, ideas, point of view, and or push an agenda upon the spectator. When creating art in any form the artist is translating their thoughts, emotions, prejudices, and ideas openly and uninhibitedly for all to see, giving the consumer an outlet to relate deeply to, build judgment upon, and treat as a distraction.

Philosophers such as Plato and Mo Tzu looked at the arts in a displeasing fashion due to the intensity some art can hold in itself as well as the emotional hold that the arts can have on individuals. Mo Tzu was known for finding the arts, especially music, to be a “dangerous distraction” from the things in life that were more important to his ideals, and Plato believed that the arts and anything else that can “infect spectators with bad expressive character” should be stopped as nothing that has that much power and influence over the emotions should be encouraged according to his philosophy. The bad expressive character can be anything from people watching a tragedy and walking around in a state of distress due to the impact of the play, to people getting riled up after seeing a political piece and wishing to change the system.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have Aristotle, who preaches that artforms are necessary to allow people to freely express their emotions as it leads to a healthier interpersonal relationship between mind and body. Additionally, he is known for suggesting that it is wrong to judge art by political criteria. Art forms such as tragedies “enable us to refine and educate the emotions by recognizing their appropriateness”. By his account, artists and their works are important to the growth of society by helping individuals to rationalize their emotions and in turn, control them. Aristotle also argues that “mature understanding and mature emotional sensitivity are inseparable ingredients in the good life of a person”, a complete counterargument to the ideals of Plato, in which intense emotions bar individuals from a fulfilling life.

Artists work to complete projects to elicit a response from the spectator whether it be good, bad, or indifferent. While the response may be poor or upsetting, that is not inherently grounds for the artist to change their piece or style as a whole, as they cannot control how the emotion portrayed will be digested by the public. To hold them accountable for the response to their work is unfair as all they did was create it. Instead, we as a whole could discourage the deep internalization of these pieces as a way to keep the world of artistic creation without restraint and promote a healthy emotional response and intelligence in individuals.

Caring about the constraints that are attempted to be placed on artists is important as the entire point of artistic expression is having the freedom to create works that touch the public regardless of whether said work or artist is widely accepted. By boxing creative minds into an umbrella of what they can and cannot do, you rid society of a large part of its culture and create an elitist subsection of what the culture used to be. Rather, by educating spectators that analyzation of artworks is fine and discouraging their internalization since this is the characteristic that causes the concerns expressed by Plato and Mo Tzu, we create an environment that supports artists in their expression without them having to be inhibited by the sake of society.

References

Cooper, David E., editor. Aesthetics: The Classic Readings. 2nd ed., Hoboken, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2019, pp. 9, 29, 44–45.