***  Haus der Kulturen der Welt: Forum1 Archive  ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   [Date]: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:29:12 +0800
   [From]: p w toy <toy1234@iinet.net.au>
     [To]: Cultural Exchange via Internet <forum1@hkw.kbx.de>
[Subject]: Re: [forum1] Re: Censorship

We live in an age in which Artists are necessary for the survival of civilization.
This moral responsibility requires Artists to become "recognized", be it an international arts festival, the State
museum or a local community.

t o m v i n c e n t wrote:

> > 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.