When I think about my first month in Arts in New York and honors English, my eyes are more open to the world of the artist. Personally, before I took these courses I did not take much interest into the artist world and what they had to go through. Now I realize how difficult their life is and how frustrating it can be to involve yourself into the world of art. The artist has it hard and I wonder if their role can ever be approved by all of society. They have so many roles to fill I just do not know if its completely possible to fill all of their roles.
I agree that one of the roles that the artist should have is to be a social critic within society. I believe that this role is critical when it comes to the artist. It gives the opportunity for expression, to blatantly state the flaws of society without a given consequence. This is one of the most commonly seen roles of society that the artist should have. I think that social criticism is needed in society because society is not perfect and it gives room for correction. However the artist as I begin to realize has such a burden to bear as a social critic. Their work maybe displayed to the public and cause certain controversy for years to come because the public might look on the work with disgust. An example of this was a piece I read by Leonard Kriegel, who believed that graffiti was absolutely a despicable form of art. In fact, he believed that graffiti would lead to urban cities’ destruction because it will cause so much public opinion to arise. Graffiti indeed is a form of art artist can express the flaws of society in this way but there can be other Kriegel’s in the world who do not agree with their work.
I think Andy Warhol’s pieces are great examples of the artist’s role as a social critic. Joseph Ketner, who wrote a book about Warhol’s exhibit summarizes Warhol’s objectives best. He says that Warhol is a “creator of literal images that mirror society” and uses “symbols that sustain us” (Ketner 39). Warhol’s pieces will show images that reflect the society that we live in. He will mainly use symbols that allow us to show what kind of society we live in. At first some pieces confused me because I could not realize what exact message did Warhol want to convey. He uses symbols such as painting Jesus with The Big C on his face to show the religious aspect of our society combined with motorcycles showing other images that were important during that time. Andy Warhol is reflecting on what was happening in his society in a form of abstract. I think Warhol was creative in taking an abstract approach to his social critique. He is criticizing society at times painting the motives that it has in an abstract form.
The artist role is not only to be a social critic, I wondered is it possible to be an active member of the community. If for example an artist places a criticism on a society that is against public opinion, will the public willingly welcome this artist into the community? I think that the artist fulfilling both roles is a very difficult task. Even if it is one piece of art that critiques society, can one truly be as active in the community. I think the artist in terms of these two roles can only fill one at a time. Either he presents work that criticizes society or he makes a piece that the community enjoys so that he can be active in the community. This is a conflict that I realize that the artist must face.
The only example that I have in terms of an artist who faced both roles was Andy Warhol. He was able to master abstract to the point where he could socially criticize a society and at the same time be an active member of the community. He presented great works such as Eggs which have nice colors but has a message that he wanted to convey. Society can enjoy the painting for its bright yet simple colors and abstract appearance. In addition Oxidations is also enjoyable for it metallic like appearance even though he did use his own urine it still gives off an amazing look. These abstracts Warhol uses are powerful tools which allows him to be a social critic and member of the community which people enjoy to this day.
I do not think that there is a hypocrisy when it comes to these two roles only if the approach was taken similar to Andy Warhol’s. If the artist decides to give up his or her role for the other then I think there is a hypocritical aspect. An artist should never have to give up what he is trying to convey in his work in order to achieve another role in society. An artist should be firm in what they want to do. Andy Warhol although he filled both roles, I think overall he wanted to just become a social critic within society but his skill allowed him to be accepted by the community. He definitely opened my eyes about the roles of an artist and I will definitely remember his work.
