Theresa Post 7

Theresa Chu

In spite of the fact that art is simply an object to be observed, it has caused a wide variety of controversies throughout history, one of the most memorable being the debates on Mapplethorpe and NEA funding. In film clips from Damned in the USA, Senator Helms and D’Amato along with other opponents of Mapplethorpe’s works were seen and heard denouncing such “obscene” and “lewd” photographs; moreover, contenders such as Reverend Donald Wildmon believed that art could truly influence behavior, and because of this, they did not want the promotion of homoerotic sentiments to be funded by the NEA. Perhaps the reason why they were so incensed by Mapplethorpe’s X Portfolio pictures was because they feared what such images could do to society; for example, viewers who see the sadomasochistic photographs may feel the urge to adorn themselves in tight leather clothing and insert bullwhips into their anuses. Although this instance is highly unrealistic, the question of the influence of art on behavior still remains. What type of behavior does art affect?
“Art is not always pleasing to our eyes. Art is to tell us something about ourselves and to make us look inside ourselves and to look at the world around us” (Steiner 56). Mapplethorpe had AIDS and eventually died because of it. Knowing this, one could argue that his controversial pictures may have expressed his own fears and outlooks on death; additionally, the photographs may have served to bring awareness to the disease. According to the quote, viewers, then, are made to look within themselves and at the world around them and see how such a disease affects them. In this way, art influences behavior but not in a way that brings harm to society.

It is difficult to agree as to whether or not creating something visual equals advocacy. It is true that, in order to make his/her work believable to the masses, the artist must be passionate about his/her creation; moreover, it is not easy to be passionate about something you do not strongly advocate or discourage. For example, Michael Moore is a director who has made his mark in the film industry by supporting his views through his documentaries. In his most recent film Sicko, Moore attacks the healthcare system of the United States and suggests that America switch to a socialized healthcare system similar to that of Canada. In this case, making something visual does equal advocacy. Another example of advocacy in art can be found in the communist propaganda posters from what was the Soviet Union. These posters showed Stalin to be the father of Russia; furthermore, the posters depicted Russians supporting Stalin and everything he encouraged.
There are examples, however, of visual creations that do not advocate its subjects but, instead, discourage it. Anti-war photographs and posters that depict war scenes and weapons exemplify how something visual does not equal promotion. Examples of visual media that are hard to determine what the artist is supporting also exists, for example Leni Riefenstahl and her Triumph of the Will. In this case, what is Riefenstahl advocating? Nazism? Beauty? Patriotism?

Being a spectator, one can experience two different forms of media: visual and textual. The visual provides viewers with a ready-made image. The artist tells the viewer what to see but does not reveal what the viewer should analyze. Textual media, on the other hand, forces readers to form their own unique image. In this way, readers can choose what to see in their minds. According to Steiner, both types of media serve to fulfill the same purpose: “What art can do, and do very well, is show us the relation between what we respond to and what we are, between our pleasure and our principles” (59).

Source:
Steiner, Wendy. The Scandal of Pleasure. Chicago: The University of Chicago P, 1995.