Identification of Art and Activism

Abstract

Since the 1990s, the range of artistic practices that have sought to enable different forms of social relations has expanded to include ‘participatory’, ‘activist’, ‘post-production’, ‘community’ or ‘dialogic’ art, but from a philosophical point of view there remains considerable confusion and a prevailing aversion to what can be with Miller generally called ‘socially engaged art’. The present paper discusses the critical potential of art, more specifically the identification of art with activism is discussed as a prime example where art became a socially engaged practice to transform and critique society. Theorist Aisling Marks is of the opinion that perhaps the main consideration of socially engaged practice is not to determine the degree of radicality with which to achieve social change, but rather how to determine a safe distance from dominant market relations that allows for direct communication and at the same time, it retains a socially transformative power. Socially engaged art, using collaborative tactics, resists clichés, but must further distance itself from dominant forces in order to retain this transformative potential. Conversely, socially engaged art that is transgressive or oppositional in nature may be closer to the art world, as it is more problematic for market forces to exploit.