***  Haus der Kulturen der Welt: Forum1 Archive  ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   [Date]: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:22:28 +0900
   [From]: t o m v i n c e n t <tomv@crisscross.com>
     [To]: Cultural Exchange via Internet <forum1@hkw.kbx.de>
[Subject]: Re: [forum1] Re: Censorship


> Does an artist need to toil away in obscurity only to die unnoticed and
>unrecognized?

yes, of course.
If s/he is not in a position to make him/herself a part of society, the
answer can only be yes.
Part of an artist's job is marketing. 'Marketing' is an ugly word, but it's
a fact and the means don't have to be ugly, they just have to work within
that society and within the artist's ethical standards. The struggle between
the artist's standards and society's standards is a vital part of the
artist's job. Depending on that society and that artist, the struggle will
be more or less intense. That is a fact of life for everyone, not just for
artists. An artist has no responsibility to be 'right', nor to be 'fair',
nor to be 'intelligent'. The artist's only responsibility is to call
her/himself an artist, and stick by that. Society must judge whether s/he is
a successful artist or not, equipped with whatever measures that society has
to judge by. A political artist is not necessarily good artist. Political
art is not necessarily good art. It is simply political. Famous art is not
necessarily good art. It is simply famous. And good art is not necessarily
recognised art. It is simply good.

Tom