this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2026
8 points (56.5% liked)

Ask Lemmy

41502 readers
1117 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !uspolitics@lemmy.world


7) No Hit-and-Run questions.
Please don't delete your post for no apparent reason. If you plan on deleting a question later, say so in the post, or if you feel that you have a good reason to remove it, message a mod beforehand. It's not fair to the ones who took their time to answer, and it's not in the spirit of the community.


8) No Bots.
Posts or comments from bots, LLM's, AIs, Neural Networks, Transformers, or Marvin the Paranoid Android are not welcome in AskLemmy. Real humans only please.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

With the rise of cancel culture, it’s something that’s got me curious, why are so many works (music, literature, tv shows, etc.) no longer separated from their controversial makers? Is it purely to do with money (e.g. not wanting to give money to people you don’t agree with?) and what about controversial people who are dead? They don’t gain anything, so why isn’t the art separated from the artist? What’s your opinion on this topic?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is though. Pretending it isn't is also a choice with a political motive. You don't necessarily have to act on every feeling it gives you though, which is kind of freeing once you learn to enjoy art like that

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

What about caveman hand paintings? Are they not art? What politics did they hold?

Not all art is political, and that’s just a fact. Yes, some art is political — I don’t disagree with that. I’m just saying, not all art is. Just because people (politicians) try to twist it into something political doesn’t always make it so.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What about caveman hand paintings? Are they not art? What politics did they hold?

They were to tell stories and communicate ideas of community, shared identity, and warnings. They were political.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

May I ask, what’s your specific definition of ‘politics’?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The term “politics” originates from the Greek politiká, meaning “affairs of the city” (polis). Aristotle, in his work Politics, conceptualizes politics as the activity that seeks the common good within the community.

Even the very fundamental beginnings of the term "politics" is rooted in how we relate to each other.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, I said what’s your definition, not the one you’ve just pulled off google

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even the very fundamental beginnings of the term “politics” is rooted in how we relate to each other.

Here is my personal comment on it. Do you think I would pull a definition of politics that I don't agree with to bolster my point of view here?

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok, fine.

Aristotle, in his work Politics, conceptualizes politics as the activity that seeks the common good within the community.

So would you argue that every single piece of art seeks to find ‘the common good’ in people with no polarisation? Are you really telling me that by your agreed definition, all art is created with this purpose?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

find ‘the common good’ in people with no polarisation?

You're expanding on the original definition that you pulled to make it seem like Aristotle would agree with you here.

All art is political. That doesn't mean it is created with the purpose of being political.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Hang on, you’re saying ‘common good’ isn’t aiming for all people to be united? What’s your definition then? Some but not all?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're putting words in my mouth like you did to Aristotle.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

So explain it then. Explain to me what he meant by ‘common good’?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why would I continue to waste time engaging in a respectful and interesting conversation with you when you're insistent on redefining my own comments and others' definitions solely so it fits within your own defined idea of politics? You're not engaging in good faith.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I’m asking you a simple question. If you can’t explain it, fine, but don’t pretend you know what you’re talking about.

All art is political. That doesn’t mean it is created with the purpose of being political

That’s bullshit. Not all art was made for the purpose you define as political, and not all art achieves that aim either

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The existence of art is political. The ability to create art is political. The freedom to create art and have a voice is political.

I already said that not all art is created with the purpose of being political. That doesn't mean it's existence isn't political.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok, but to be called ‘political’ do you agree that art must either have been created political, or serve a political purpose?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Explain how it can be political without either being created political or serving a political purpose?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The existence of art is political. The ability to create art is political. The freedom to create art and have a voice is political.

[–] ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Art is one way we relate to or communicate with each other. It is inherently political.

Hannah Arendt, in her work The Human Condition, redefines politics as the space of appearance where individuals, through action and speech, reveal their identity and participate in the construction of the common world. For Arendt, politics is not merely an institutional activity but the manifestation of human plurality and the capacity to initiate something new.​

I disagree, but I’m not going to be hostile about it, you have your view, I have mine. We’re not going to convince each other to change

[–] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

All art is political, because it depends on the politics of the society it was created.

First we need to agree on a definition of political, in general I think a good definition is "dealing with the structure, organization, and administration of the state".

So, a cave painting, just like any art that shows you how people live in a society is exposing the structure, organization and possibly administration of the state, which is the very definition of politics.

Here's the thing, any art is either based on reality or fictitious. Art based on reality like portraits or biographies are political because they show you the society as it is. On the other hand fictitious art shows you failures or limitations of the society they were written in, or sometimes they offer metaphors to draw parallels or point at stuff in the society they were written.

If you think art is not political I ask you to find me some piece of art that does not deal with the structure, organization or administration of the state.

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Since Velma was quick and already pretty well defined what we know about cave paintings, I'd actually like to add on to your question since this is one of my favorite topics.

There's a lot of art out there that was created because artists set out to create something that isn't specifically political. That's a little harder to escape politics on because the artists had a motive in mind when they wanted to pursue that goal. Something of note though that was in popular discourse around four years ago though was Zombie Formalism which was shown to be created as a genre of painting used as fiat currency for the wealthiest people to exchange and launder money. While that context is pretty political, if you only look at the intent of the artists they were trying to make art that said as little as possible in order to not draw any attention and be an effective form of untaxed currency. That could be a plausible bet, depending on how you personally invoke Death of the Author

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Zombie Formalism which was shown to be created as a genre of painting used as fiat currency for the wealthiest people to exchange and launder money.

This was a good read, thank you for linking it!

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

My pleasure, thanks for bearing with me through all the typos in that reply