Should art be political, and is it really unavoidable?

should art be political, and is it really unavoidable?

Not Veeky Forums, go to Veeky Forums

don't tell me what tot do, go to Veeky Forums yourself

Any dumb question like this hasn't had enough exposure to art.

you don't have to be mean

Yes.

>which seeks to ignore worldly problems in favor pretending one is outside of them.
This is very wrong. Some people actually are "outside" them, as in above the petty issues that go on in politics, and they create art in the same manner that they dream (out of necessity of passion).

he's right tho

No, in fact good art has nothing to do with politics at all

I can only imagine the ideology behind this post

Overtly political art just shows how toothless it really is.

>good art has nothing to do with politics at all
>He didn't start with the greeks.

aristotle was the first to define what constitutes good art, and it did not involve politics
plato just hated fun so his opinion doesn't count

Liberals are just butthurt that the only good political art is right wing. Left wing "art" is people helplessly screaming at the sky because it's 1yr anniversary of Hillary losing and the book Holes

Reminder that thinking you're free of ideology is about as submersed in pure ideology you can get

that's not how you use comas you fucking piece of shit

>moan at people for making grammatical errors
>make grammatical errors in your own post

Poor attempt at shitposting

So are you gonna claim that Homer wasn't extremely political on his works? What about Herodotus and Thucydides? The Tragedians? Because you'd be retarded to claim that they either didn't make good art or were apolitical.
What's even your definition of politics?

>using examples as an argument
uhh?

It might be impossible to completely rid oneself of ideology, but the artist should strive towards this

Art that -tries- to be political is going to be shit 100% of the time.

What are you arguing, exactly? Does being subconsciously political qualify? Then sure. We are all subconsciously political, among many other things. Not all artists consciously strive to put political messages in their work, however, and not all certainly make this their work's GOAL, even when they consciously use political iconography in their stories. Sometimes the goal of a story is to be a good romance and the political backdrop assists that, for example, and in that case the artist's work doesn't have much to do with politics. It may rely on political scenarios in order to facilitate what they are going for, but the artist is ultimately not concerned with political jabbering or nation-to-nation relationships.

>should art be political
no
>is it really unavoidable
yes

Politics should be art.

>should art be political
fuck no. while you can say that every work of art is political, that doesn't mean that every work of art should be conscientiously taking a political stance.

Art can be interpreted politically, but art that starts out with a political message is just propaganda.

The problem is that constantly interpreting art pieces politically means you're an ideologue, not someone who actually enjoys art.

Upton Sinclair's alright