More information on exiled artists: http://www.ac-grenoble.fr/comenius/berges/Documents/France/Travaux/Italie/ExiledArtisit.pdf
Essay: "Imaginary Homelands" by Salman Rushdie http://philosophy.ucsc.edu/news-events/colloquia-conferences/Rushdie1992ImaginaryHomelands.pdf
In the above Essay, Rushdie explores the meaning of "Home" from the point of view of someone who was forced away from the place he called Home. He uses this platform to philosophically contemplate that which we tie ourselves to and the reasons, sometimes worthy and sometimes not, for untying ourselves. It is a short read--I highly recommend. (Hemingway wrote of his craft as a "moveable feast", one that he could do from anywhere in the world--he could gorge himself on his artworks. It makes me wonder, do many artists feel this way? As though they 'trick' those in power by taking their platform with them, even in exile?)
This week, we barely brushed the very controversial surface of the purpose of art, the motivators of art, and why we create. For this week's blog, I want you think about the motivator of art being a voice for the silenced. Many artists, once their art is made public, are seen as threats to the government, to the state of "calm" (or control) perceived by those with power, or as a threat to power. Perhaps this is why the marginalized are not the ones recording History.
Pablo Picasso (painter, Spain), Salman Rushdie (Essayist/Novelist, India), Shirin Neshat (Photographer/artist see TedTalk above, Iran), Azar Nafisi (novelist Reading Lolita in Tehran), Eugene Ionesco (writer), and many, many others have been forced away from their homelands due to the art they create. The question we want to ask them: Was it worth it? Was being able speak through your art worth being kept from 'home'?
We can't help but think that there must be another reason motivating these artists to produce this kind of art--but what is that motivation?
In your response ruminate on the concept of artists in exile. Feel free to find an example if you like, or just write in general:
- What is their motivation?
- Why do they create art despite the horrifying consequences?
- Is the art they produce more/less important than the art someone who isn't faced with such consequences made?
- What work does this kind of art do in the making of meaning? How does it contribute to the collective/individual knowledge spheres?
- What truths, if any, does this kind of art hold?
No comments:
Post a Comment