Sunday, March 15, 2009

Cotton Eye Joe

Hello, internet! Please remain seated for the duration of your voyage, keeping your hands, arms, legs, and feet inside the vehicle. And please, no flash photography.

Today’s question is whether or not I agree with Richard Wright’s assertion that artists and politicians stand on opposite poles.

First of all, I’m going to assume that this is talking about politicians who actually are interested in the advancement of society. More and more I’m finding that there actually aren’t that many of these kinds of politicians. But if we assume that lil’ ricky is talking about altruistic politicians, then... Yes, I agree with him.

I don’t really consider the movies I make to be art, but for the moment, let’s assume that they’re art. And let’s stretch our imaginations even further and assume that I’m a moderately good artist.

I create my movies (at least the non-documentary ones) with the purpose of actually offending my audience. If not, I at least make them to be controversial. I believe that the purpose of art is to inspire independent thought in individuals, not what Wright said about conveying the meaning of life (42) and what not. I would be much happier if everyone strongly disagreed with a film that I made than if they wholeheartedly agreed with me.

Politicians, on the other hand, want to please everybody. If they offend people, then their power will be taken away from them, and they can’t improve the world. Politicians have to stay on the good side of the public, as opposed to artists, who can do whatever they want.

And that’s over my word limit. Good hat.

No comments: