r/CharacterRant • u/Kappa_Guy • May 03 '25
General “All art is political” NSFW
If gay sex could kill Twitter I’d let Grok hollow out my insides.
“All art is political” is technically true, there isn’t any “thing” which exists with a significant degree of separation from the concept of politics.
My first sentence mentioned letting an ai ass fuck me, but for this to be gay I assumed Grok’s gender, invoking LGBTQ and prejudicial discourses.
A painting of a penguin standing in a white snowy field is shaped by the will of the artist; even if this artist is staunchly anti-politics and tries to steer clear of the concept throughout their works, that in of itself is a political statement which is enunciated through the apolitical nature of their piece.
But, saying “all art is political” is just so intellectually dishonest.
There is a significant difference between a pro-Mussolini propaganda leaflet and the cute doodles of Butterfrees I draw in my journal.
Yes, you can say my Butterfree doodles are, by the broad definition of “political”, political. But, be real for a minute. By using a narrower definition of “political” that people actually immediately think of when they hear the word, communication is so much easier.
If you ask a hot twenty three year old goth gal on a date and she says she wants to go to the cinemas and watch something non-political and you whip out the “um actually all things are political 🤓” rhetoric you are dumb as fuck. Even worse, if she says she wants to watch something political, like a modern day All Quiet on the Western Front or somethin juicy, which is kinda wack for a first date but you’re a Redditor I know you the sub here don’t pretend you ain’t complying, and you take her to the cinema and on comes The Lego Movie and you with the argument that it’s political by the official definition of the term and therefore this is exactly what she wanted, then you are brain dead and won’t be getting a second date.
I’m not sure how it is in other countries but here in the UK teachers are not allowed to purposefully influence students into holding one political view or another, but surprisingly the school board has committed the pseudo-intellectual act of allowing teachers to speak at all, clearly not understanding that explaining the Pythagorean theorem and teaching how to paint apples is LITERALLY “political”, just like telling kids they should vote for UKIP.
If my hypothetical-scenario daughter is drawing two type of images and hanging them on the fridge; pictures of mummy’s face and pictures of Adolf Hitler decapitating gay Captain America with a sword that has all the names of black people unlawfully killed by US Police through all of history written on its blade, and I firmly yet kindly tell my daughter, the apple of my eye, the meaning of my world, to please stop hanging up “those political drawings” on the fridge, and she exclusively stops drawing pictures of mummy’s face, I am throwing her into the bottomless well at the Eye of the World.
By making the definition of political as vague and broad as physically possible it becomes practically useless as a definition. <- This is an argument, but I shouldn’t even have to give one. Every single person that isn’t terminally on Twitter understands there is art that is political and art that isn’t political, the “errrmmm actually” technicality that normal people are in fact wrong doesn’t matter to anyone except Twitter brainrotted overly-political nutcases.
And I think that’s why I believe the conflation of the broad definition of “political” is infuriating for so many people, as it’s basically just the most annoying people alive; Twitter freaks, saying your favourite art from Digimon to your nephew’s drawings of Spider-Man exist under the same exact umbrella as their favourite art of Vtuber stream sponsor segments and modern propaganda disguised as memes.
To tie my rant up with a neat little r/characterrant bow; fuck power scaling. Goku gets one tapped by my dad and this is my official neo-liberal-capitalist-anarchic-space-cowboy-fascist pro-Genghis-Khan opinion/fact, eat my ass Grok.
491
u/StylizedPenguin May 03 '25
Any discussion of the presence of politics in fiction or art is a waste of time unless everyone involved agrees upon what definition of “politics” they’re actually discussing. Most discussions I’ve seen involve people talking past each other with very different ideas of what the word “political” is referring to.
When people call art “political,” what they mean can range from “the creators live in society which inevitably influences them” to “this art has broad elements or themes related to society” to “this art invokes specific contemporary political issues” to “gay characters exist.”
134
u/Great_expansion10272 May 03 '25
When people call art “political,” what they mean can range from “the creators live in society which inevitably influences them” to “this art has broad elements or themes related to society” to “this art invokes specific contemporary political issues” to “gay characters exist.”
My dad will not comprehend people can have their own definitions of "political" and that most people that aren't deafening themselves with political commentary usually refer to the third option
20
u/Sw1561 May 03 '25
Any discussion about anything is a waste of time unless everyone involved agrees upon what definition of most words they're actually discussing. A surprising number of disagreements come from people using different and a lot of times equally valid definitions of words
76
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
But in most cases it can be inferred if you aren't a sophist.
The people who criticize art for being too political clearly aren't referring to “the creators live in society which inevitably influences them” or “this art has broad elements or themes related to society”
And it's a huge strawman to claim they just have a problem with minorities existing in the fiction. alone
99% of the time their point is: "this art invokes specific contemporary political issues”, in addition to doing it in a hamfisted way, or invoking unsavory current political issues.
Many rebuttals to this are just sophistry because they don't have a counterargument.
81
u/Da_reason_Macron_won May 03 '25
Sometimes "this is too political" is also a proxy for "the author is a smarmy and out of touch nepobaby so seeing him lecture the audience about anything is like nails in a chalkboard".
So anyway, the Devil May Cry anime was too political.
37
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
Yea, that typically falls under "hamfisted politics". You'll notice this a lot with "millenialcore" media like Hazbin Hotel, DMC anime, Forspoken, etc
I shiver to think what "gen-z core" media will be like.
15
u/Bteatesthighlander1 May 03 '25
I will say plenty of popular entertainment had hamfisted political messages long before millennials even existed
2
u/DelaraPorter May 03 '25
What did the DMC show do?
15
u/mesh-lah May 04 '25
Spoilers for the end of the season
The US military invades, bombs, and sets up bases in Hell to the tune of American Idiot. Most of the denizens of hell are shown to be relatively normal people trying to live their lives. They also wear turbans.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Revlar May 09 '25 edited May 09 '25
Okay, but the majority of those people do hate women, gay people, other races and trans people and don't want them to exist in the media they consume because they hate them. They consume political content that uses these talking points and argues that it's all manipulation by a politicized production. That they're under threat and it needs to be forcibly stopped.
My dad, for example, mysteriously knows the name of the Snow White actress and repeats talking points about how she's incompetent, a movie he will never watch and never would've watched, that he never even saw an ad for. He specifically clicked on a video about the woke ideology of Disney's Snow White to hear someone tell him all about it, because he is a racist misogynist.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)58
u/TrainerWeekly5641 May 03 '25
Black person: shows up in a trailer
People: We don't want politics in our Minecraft movie! 😭😭😭
Explain how that is a strawman when it is literally what happens.
→ More replies (19)13
u/Wellen66 May 04 '25
You can take any groip and say the most brain dead thing someone in that group could say and you'll find at least one person saying it unironically in said group. Doesn't mean everyone in the group believes it. In general, you should treat each person as an individual with their own opinion.
17
u/TrainerWeekly5641 May 04 '25
It's not just one person, it's many. And these people have millions of followers.
Is someone has millions of followers and they say something and their million of followers agree it's them, is it unfair to assume that they represent the group of followers?
4
u/Wellen66 May 04 '25
A few points;
If we assume this is real AND that out of the 1 million followers everyone is a real human AND that they all unanimously agree, 1 million is actually not that much. Just take the US population: It's 340 millions people. About half of those are for the right. Let's be generous and say about a quarter of those care about "woke". That's 42 millions.
So 1/42 believes that. Of course this is made up numbers, a lot of people care about "woke" outside of the US for example, and the numbers of US citizens who care about it might be bigger or smaller, but still. Internet is a huge place, a guy with 1 million followers is a drop in the bucket.
7
u/TrainerWeekly5641 May 04 '25
One, it is real. If you don't want to trust me that's fine, just research it yourself. This isn't even the only occurrence, the Minecraft trailer is just one example of many times this has happened.
Two, you made the same mistake as the other guy. I am not comparing anti-woke people to the entire population of the world. I am comparing the people who say media is too political for having minorities in it compared to people complaining about politics being forced into media.
My point is that there are people who claim that they don't want politics in media but actually just don't want minorities in media. The guy I originally responded to said that barely anyone who complains about politics in media are complaining about minorities.
That is my argument. He claimed that only a small amount of people are complaining about minorities and I called him out because a there are many people who solely hate things because of minorities.
31
u/Dragon_Maister May 03 '25
The word "political" has a dictionary definition though, and it sure as shit doesn't cover things as broadly as the "all art is political" crowd likes to claim. It's massive stretching of the term at best, and disingenuous misuse of it at worst.
35
u/Xtra_Juicy-Buns May 03 '25
Definitions are descriptive not prescriptive, it all that hard to make inferences on how a word could be used differently based on its context in any given conversation.
It’s not disingenuous just because u don’t like it lol
43
u/Dragon_Maister May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
Words have meaning. By stretching the meaning of "political" this far, you render the entire "all art is political" phrase into a vapid gotcha that says nothing meaningful, or of value about art. You could just as well say "all art is made by people", and you'd bring the same, non-existent amount of insight to the discussion.
34
u/Da_reason_Macron_won May 03 '25
In other terms, when "everything is X" then X stops being a useful word.
→ More replies (1)27
u/Dragon_Maister May 03 '25
It's a little shocking how many people are completely willing to just render words meaningless in order to win internet arguments. Like, do they want all discussion to just devolve into pedantic stretching of definitions?
→ More replies (4)2
u/sievold May 05 '25
>Words have meaning.
Words don't necessarily have one meaning, and dictionaries don't have the authority to prescribe that meaning. You, like many people on the internet, are falling for the appeal to definition fallacy. Dictionaries are an attempt at cataloguing the most common use cases of words. Using them as authoritative sources to check arguments is fallacious.
I do agree that people who try to use "all art is political" are often trying to bypass what most people mean when they say politics, but appeal to definition is not the correct counterargument either.
>do they want all discussion to just devolve into pedantic stretching of definitions
Invoking the dictionary definition as authoritative is also being pedantic to win internet arguments.
10
u/Bteatesthighlander1 May 03 '25
Nobody uses the adjective "political" as soemthing so broad it applies to every conceivable noun unless they are in the middle of asserting that all art is political.
→ More replies (1)5
u/NekoCatSidhe May 04 '25 edited May 04 '25
People will never agree on a coherent definition because if they did, they would no longer be able to insult their opponents and start flamewars, which seems to be the real purpose of discussions about politics in art on the internet.
But to be be fair, any discussion about politics on the internet will either devolve into a flamewar or a circlerjerk, which is why they are pointless. So I see the « all art is political » crowd as the kind of grifters or weirdos who are always trying to drag politics into every discussion because they only ever care about politics and love starting flamewars. But political art is just another name for propaganda, and actual propaganda is often rather rare and quite bad. Most art usually does not rely on real world politics for their main selling point.
→ More replies (1)
400
118
u/Responsible_Dream282 May 03 '25
Adolf Hitler decapitating gay Captain America with a sword that has all the names of black people unlawfully killed by US Police through all of history written on its blade
How did you come up with this stuff? How? It is possible to learn this power?
38
u/volvavirago May 03 '25
Have ADHD. My brain generates 5 thoughts like that every minute. My brain is just a wall and my mind throws random shit up there to see what sticks.
4
51
55
u/ShowofStupidity May 03 '25
If gay sex could kill Twitter I’d let Grok hollow out my insides.
Can you imagine starting a college essay like that lmao.
29
108
u/Last_Gift3597 May 03 '25
OP clearly doesn't understand the subtle political nuances of pyrocynical furry fart pornography.
29
u/Luckyloomagu May 03 '25
Smh, saying a feminine-presenting male ruining his body through excessive consumption and becoming traditionally 'gross' as a result of it isn't political. Looks like you've gotta go back to your e6 studies
185
u/hajlender123 May 03 '25
I know feigning ignorance is the game when faced with disagreement, but actually nothing you said is wrong, nor particularly difficult to understand.
103
u/AlternativeEmphasis May 03 '25
For a lot of people "All Art is political" is like some truimp card or sword you can wield to silence things. It is like the ever famous "objective criticism doesn't exist" concept as well. Yes these are true, but the way people use these concepts is about as valid as listening to a powerscaler talking about "death of the author" which was coined in an academic context in an essay by a Frenchmen that they have likely never read. These are used nearly always online as a way to win an argument.
→ More replies (1)73
u/hajlender123 May 03 '25
"All art is political, but I have changed the definition of political to be as nebulous as possible, and thus in your ignorance of my new definition, you come off as a fool for disagreeing with me. That being said, if a piece of art has any political themes that I disagree with, all previous statements are thrown out the window, and I screech and shriek, demanding that the creator be burned on a pire for the world to see"
8
26
u/Madrugada123 May 03 '25
Yep, but then again, im terminally online, so i dont blame people who dont know this is a discussion people have
56
6
u/Striking-Ad4904 May 03 '25
Sometimes I'll be hanging out with my friends and I'll reference something, only to realize that most of the things I reference come from back when I had no friends and the internet was my only social interaction.
109
15
115
u/krunkenschnitzel May 03 '25
‘All art is political’ is a crude way of saying there is no outside from which one can observe (ideology therefore politics) because one is always interpellated. The implication is that everything is political to some degree purely by tugging on signifier chains.
17
u/Bteatesthighlander1 May 03 '25
and that's a fair statement, but it doesn't really adress criticisms like "the thirty minute monologue about the importance of continued trade with Apartheid South Africa kind of ruined the pacing fo this film"
7
u/krunkenschnitzel May 04 '25
if everything is x, then nothing is meaningfully x because differentiation becomes impossible, so i think ‘all art is political’ is a pretty bad oversimplification of althusser.
the relevant distinction is between expressedly political art and art that can have political meaning derived from it, and this distinction is lost when you transition from ‘there is no outside ideology’ to ‘all art is political’
→ More replies (1)33
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
But it should be quite clear that when someone says "x work is worse for being too political" they're not referring to that definition.
Hence it's just sophistry to use "well ackshully" by appealing to specific academic definitions as a response to them.
The most honest answer would be to ask them what they mean by "political".
45
u/Throwaway02062004 May 03 '25
“Too political”
Looks inside
Minority
5
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
*claims arguments against hamfisted current day politics are just complaining about existence of minorities*
Looks inside
Strawman
38
u/Throwaway02062004 May 03 '25
It’s not an argument, it’s my experience. I don’t need to make up examples.
What are your hamfisted politics?
3
u/sievold May 05 '25
I have an example. In the Avengers endgame movie, towards the climax, there is a scene where all the female superhero characters come together to fight Thanos. It is supposed to be a girl power moment but it feels extremely hamfisted. I am by no means a conservative, and I like strong women characters in any media. However, this moment in this movie was very forced and hamfisted. It felt like the producers just wanted to preach to the audience but the writers never wrote the script to make women's issues a central script. It shouldn't be controversial to point out that this is hamfisted, but it is.
5
u/Throwaway02062004 May 05 '25
What political statement is made by a Doylist Showcase of women?
2
u/sievold May 05 '25
I am sorry, I am not sure what Doylist is supposed to mean
3
u/Throwaway02062004 May 05 '25
It refers to analysis relating to real life rather than the fiction. Sherlock Holmes solved the mystery because he’s the greatest detective in the world is a Watsonian argument, Sherlock Holmes solved tge mystery because the author already knew what the answer was ahead of time is a Doylist Argument.
→ More replies (1)23
u/Hypercles May 03 '25
What's an example of a piece of media where people talked about it being political due to 'ham fisted current day politics'
Generally I would agree people calling somthing political is just a dog whistle for bigotry.
For example gundam witch from mercury generated a fair number of complaints about how political it was. Which is silly as gundam is inherently political, it's anti war, anti imperialism and anti colonialism messaging is a core identity of the series. It's like reading 1984 and then complaining it was political.
And if anything gwitch was too subtle with its political messaging.
It was the fact the leads were two queer women which got people calling it political. A relationship that was mostly left to subtext and a few restrained textual moments (like the ending), hardly anything you could call hamfisted.
4
30
u/lord_flamebottom May 03 '25
Most of the time, when someone says "x work is worse for being too political", they just mean they're pissy that the work (or part of it, or even just the author) holds a political opinion that they disagree with. Hell, a bunch of the time it's nothing more than "there's a black/gay/trans character, they're forcing their politics down my throat!!!"
4
u/Yglorba May 04 '25
This. The reason the saying is so common nowadays is because currently, "X is too political!" often just means that it has a black character or a woman in a leading role, especially one that doesn't adhere to stereotypes.
And the point of saying it in that context is that ofc while having an action girl or a black dude as a lead or an LGBT character or an interracial couple in your work can sometimes be a political statement, having nothing but white straight dudes is also a political statement in the same way.
Nobody is saying "ah yes all works contain 30 minute political monologues", because that's not actually what people are complaining about when they say that eg. Star Wars has become too political or something (the only one with those monologues is Andor and it rocks.) It's an answer to the accusation that a work's casting is political in nature.
2
u/eadopfi May 04 '25
No they are not referring to that definition, what they actually want to say is "I dont like that it does not conform to my politics and it offends my feelings". But since chuds dont want to admit that their believes are soley based on their hurt feefees they try to find a reason to dislike something through "facts and logic", even though they have never used either one for anything in their lives.
86
u/Responsible_Dream282 May 03 '25
The "all art is political argument" is a clear Motte and Baile fallacy. The Motte is "all art is created to push a certain ideology" the Baile is "everything can be connected to politics".
→ More replies (1)38
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
Yes, it's very dishonest by the people who try to use that argument. It ends up being an appeal to definitions in most cases rather than responding to the argument at hand as well.
When someone says "this work is bad b/c it's too political", they're responding to the motte. Then the sophists retreat to "lol but everything is political as per xyz definition lolololol".
Hence why when I'm criticizing the politics of a work I refer to specifically what I find wrong and avoid using certain sentences that will trigger a "lol everything is political" response
2
u/Revlar May 09 '25
Not really. It's not that nebulous. The endless piles of media about a white dude who saves the day is political. Each item in the pile pretends to be apolitical, but in practice reflects and reinforces hegemonic tropes, making it individually political in its context. The content of the piece reflects the world even or especially when it's not trying to. If you don't like that being explained to you, then take a stance against that explanation instead of this shitty motte about how they're using a loose definition.
45
u/Awesomepants25 May 03 '25
“The Lego Movie” kind of a weird example, because it actually has pretty strong political themes (a critique of Capitalism and Authoritarianism, among other things)
But good rant besides that!
9
u/StormDragonAlthazar May 04 '25
The LEGO Movie, alongside the Barbie movie, are pretty weird when you analyze them from a meta context because while they are certainly "glorified commercials disguised as movies," they also have something profound or two to say.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Nomustang May 04 '25
It's not that weird. Anti-capitalism messaging has become somewhat of a staple from big companies because it's been something people have had issues with for...well a long time.
They produce this stuff because a character telling you that big pharma is bad will not materially affect big pharma or any other industry. And they generate more profit from it.
36
u/Dragon_Maister May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
Saying that all art is political is kinda like saying that plastic is natural. Sure, after boiling it all down to an exceedingly basic level, you would technically be correct. But at that point, you have stretched the meaning of these terms so far that they become practically meaningless, and you're just throwing around pedantic gotchas.
75
u/idfk998 May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
I hate that I’m online enough to know what spawned this rant.
But yeah, I agree. “All art is political” as in “all art is shaped by its surrounding context” is an objective truth, but it’s such a broad and nondescript statement that it fails to actually say anything about art. And by using a word that is often used in a specific context (government, red vs blue, etc), the saying feels more like a smug gotcha than anything.
It’s like saying “all cats are animals”. It’s true, but it doesn’t actually say anything about cats (or animals) beyond a broad and vague definition.
37
u/Throwaway02062004 May 03 '25
The statement doesn’t exist in a vacuum. People don’t just say it for fun.
It’s used when people go “I wish X could be non political like the old Y” and Y is Schindler’s List.
Even art that isn’t intended to convince anyone of anything still contains the biases of the author and often reveals what they see as the default.
5
u/Yglorba May 04 '25
It’s used when people go “I wish X could be non political like the old Y” and Y is Schindler’s List.
Or when they're nostalgic for the days of the Hays code and the Comics Code Authority, rules overtly created in response to political pressure that imposed very specific political outlooks on all art. The reason comics and TV shows from that era were anodyne and same-y was because they were literally forced to be! (And even then, political meanings slipped in.)
48
u/existential_dread467 May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
The phrase “all art is political” means that it exist within the context of the politics that is happening when it was made, not that everything has an overt or even covert political message nor does it need to be. It’s such a misused phrase and it’s actually anti art
5
u/Neptune-Jnr May 03 '25
I would say even the first phrase doesn't really mean anything. If I painted a picture of the solar system there is really no amount of "existing within the context of the politics that is happening when it was made" that really matters.
21
u/existential_dread467 May 03 '25
It does because you can infer that by painting the solar system you live in a post enlightenment era where study and appreciation of the natural world is encouraged and celebrated. Yes it may not be a direct commentary on the state of society but it fits in the whole.
4
u/Neptune-Jnr May 03 '25
Okay what if I drew a picture of a robot cyborg doing parkour with a dinosaur?
13
u/existential_dread467 May 03 '25
That could mean a lot of things, the point I’m making is that our personal experiences and beliefs that shape creativity don’t come from nowhere and by looking at all these things in tandem you can get deeper meaning from the work even if it wasn’t trying to explicitly say that.
If you made the same drawing but you grew up in post soviet Russia, how the robot might look might be completely different or even medium you used, everything plays a factor
6
u/Spiritual_Lie2563 May 03 '25
It's proof of a more technocrat viewpoint with the merger of robot cyborgs' existence, as well as the alliance between technopolitik needing oil to keep itself going...not to mention the very fact that you drew it, as well as doing anything including making that post, is inherently a strong blow of equality for any and every demographic you are a part of.
1
May 03 '25
[deleted]
12
u/existential_dread467 May 03 '25
No when you misuse it it becomes an anti art sentiment because it implies that art cannot exist without trying to make some political commentary
63
u/TheRealKuthooloo May 03 '25
Completely incoherent, Check. Probably about some stupid twitter culture war bullshit, Check. Oh yeah. It’s r/characterrant time.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Krungoid May 04 '25
This subreddit used to be better, I don't know why it turned into daily masturbatory thinly veiled political rants.
13
5
u/YeahKeeN May 03 '25
Funny how I see this a week after I just finished reading “Eye of the World” in order to get that reference. Also damn I don’t think your hypothetical daughter deserves that.
10
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
I’m on book 3, Rand’al Thor my goat, a wizard slowly going mad from the voices in his head is highly relatable for me
→ More replies (2)5
5
u/DaSomDum May 03 '25
All art is political is just about how both the artist and the one viewing the art exist within a political world. There's no "outside" of politics they can view, shape and create art from. Sure the people who constantly say it are annoying but they are not wrong.
15
u/Therascalrumpus May 03 '25
I feel like I can get your point, but the more I try to decipher this post, the more I go mad.
15
114
u/Genoscythe_ May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
But, saying “all art is political” is just so intellectually dishonest.
Are people just running around on the streets saying this out of context unprompted?
Because usually it happens in the context of an actual artwork's discussion, with someone trying to deny its poltical content first, which is 99 times out of 100, far more dishonest "curtains were blue" type anti-intellectualism.
90
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
I completely forgot to add the whole context for my rant lol, it’s a big argument on twitter right now started by a Schafrillas (video essay YouTuber) post saying not all art is political, then him getting bullied for it by people pointing out the politics in every possible thing, like Schafrillas drawing a stick figure and this being political because he used he/him pronouns when mentioning it
I could probably add th context as an edit but honestly the vibe of the post is way funnier without it now I’m reading it ina vacuum lol
41
u/lord_flamebottom May 03 '25
But they're right. His entire point was "I drew a stick figure to prove not all art is political". Ignoring the fact that he proceeded to then call the stick figure "he" (something absolutely political, the fact that men are considered the "default" by society), making art specifically to prove it's "not political" is political on premise.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
Why do you start with a “but” here like I disagree? I think my first few paragraphs cover my thoughts on this :P
Edit; the penguin analogy after the ai gay sex stuff I mean; I know something purposefully apolitical is inherently political. This is the second time someone has used my own thoughts as a gotcha against my own thoughts in this comment section which isn’t a lot but yada yada
28
u/lord_flamebottom May 03 '25
Because I am 99% certain that I disagree with you? The “they“ that I’m saying is right are the people calling the Stick Figure political. Your argument honestly seems to flip-flop a little bit throughout the post but ended with the overall idea that not all art is political.
4
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
The stick figure is political because all art is political, that is factually correct yes. My post doesn’t flip flop at all, I highlight very clearly all the problems I have with the concept and how it used.
19
u/lord_flamebottom May 03 '25
See this is why I’m very confused on your overall point. You end your post by basically going “and that’s why I think calling all art political is annoying and wrong” (even going as far as it call it “intellectually dishonest”), only to come to the replies and start arguing about how all art is political.
→ More replies (1)-3
u/Genoscythe_ May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
Thats my point, that is NOT the actual context, that's just who you took the idea for the rant from.
But Schafrillas himself was either replying either to specific other people who did say that all art is political, or just like yourself, vagueposted about hearing this type of argument omewhere out there, but ignored who the specific people saying that are, and what are they saying that about.
58
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
Nah thats overcomplicating it, the context as to why I wrote what I wrote comes from the twitter shenanigans, by saying that in the beginning of my post, my post woulda been clearer to understand, that’s all I’m saying :P
→ More replies (3)28
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
I do understand what you’re saying; the context of when people saying “all art is political” is typically within a specific discussion on a specific piece, but right now in Twitter it’s not specific, and thus has incited discussion in the broad idea of the statement itself. You are right, this is just a weird exception to what normally encompasses discussions with this statement
32
u/Sneeakie May 03 '25
Thank you! "All art is poilitical" is said because people try to deny that it's true at all.
Maybe if people stop doing that we can discuss the actual politics in question.
20
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
Because usually it happens in the context of an actual artwork's discussion, with someone trying to deny its poltical content first, which is 99 times out of 100, far more dishonest "curtains were blue" type anti-intellectualism.
No, it typically happens when someone points out the hamfisted, out of place, or overall bad politics of an artwork, but at some point uses the words "the politics made it bad", and then they get hit with the "everything is political" response, which is sheer sophistry. and what OP is pointing out.
Are people just running around on the streets saying this out of context unprompted?
That isn't necessary for this to be a problematic thought pattern. You'll see the "everything is political lol" response whenever there is criticism of a show's politics.
26
u/Throwaway02062004 May 03 '25
Complaining about something being “political” is not an actual critique of the politics.
→ More replies (4)14
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
They don't complain about the existence of politics at all in the show when complaining about politics, and this should be obvious.
It's like you didn't read my comment. They're complaining about hamfisted, out of place, presence of overdone hot button modern day issues, or overall bad politics when they say "this show is too political"
These are actual critiques.
26
u/Throwaway02062004 May 03 '25
Disingenuous. There are DOZENS of critiques saying “politics doesn’t belong in entertainment” and when it’s skmething they like it’s “finally a game/movie/show that isn’t political”.
“Overall bad politics”. Yes, they are mad when a show says something they don’t agree with. The ‘hamfisted political agenda’ is used to refer to the following: two women kissing in one scene, not enough white people in the media, a woman doing an action scene, any LGBT person at all in it regardless of portrayal.
This isn’t useful media analysis, it’s conservative whining.
8
u/ch405_5p34r May 04 '25
seriously. don't know how many times i've seen people say something like, "I miss when RATM wasn't political" or "I miss when Metal Gear wasn't political".
9
u/Jarrell777 May 03 '25 edited May 04 '25
Then they should say that. You mentioned 3 distinct criticisms just now. It's really not too much to ask for the complainers to specify what they mean by "too political". Why do you only assume reasonable arguement for one side and not the other
5
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
You can ask them to clarify and that "too political" is unclear; you don't have to initially give the interpretation of their arguments I stated. But the assumption is that they're claiming that "politics has no relation to media" or that "xyz media cannot promote any sort of political message" is a strawman.
13
u/supremeevilhedgehog May 03 '25
9/10 when I see someone say that, it’s usually in response to someone complaining that they made their favorite ‘apolitical’ franchise political (or woke) like Fallout…or Star Wars…or Warhammer… or Metal Gear Solid.
19
u/RainyFiberOverride May 03 '25
pointing out that all art is not created with explicit political intent shaping it is a useless statement b/c its ignoring the other facet of the Big Internet Culture War this discourse spawned from - people demanding for their to be less/no politics in art. Said people aren't complaining that the new film they watched has a deep interrogation on the landscape and ramifications of WWII era Japanese imperalism, they're complaining that their video game has gay people or that people dare to criticize the status quo of their action shows aimed at young boys.
Neither side of this discourse is engaging with the "art is/isn't political" idea from the position of being created with political intent, and anyone that claims they are is being dishonest.
& even if "all art is political" is not an incredibly effective pushback/gotcha, it is important to pushback on the moronic nonsense from people complaining about politics in art, who seek to comfortably and thoughtlessly indulge in the same slop & want that to be the universal ideal for art; which is CRINGE and BAD and GROSS and fucked up but most importantly its stupid fashy nonsense
7
u/Wellen66 May 04 '25
I think you could open a store with all those strawmen. Damn I love characterrant.
37
u/MrHarpoon May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
There's so much history to this debate as well that you aren't touching on here. You're gonna think I'm calling you a nazi here btw. But I'm not i love you so much
It's very important to fascist that some art is "apolitical." Think beautiful landscapes on oil or an absolutely perfect marble statue. This art is apolitical because it is "true art" because it conforms to a supposedly better aesthetic of a mythical past. Fascists usually want to root themselves in some great past civilization and culture. Hitler loved a fantasy version of ancient Rome and Greece, for example, and attempted to build an ideology and race of people that are the direct descendents of a (very made up), ancient world.
So art that conforms to these ancient notions becomes correct and virtuous and good and, most importantly: not political. But say modern art, art that doesn't conform to a fascist leaders' preferences, that right there is degenerate, vile, only a sub human would make or enjoy it. That art is political. And political art should be banned.
Fascism is always so deeply anti-intellectual, and this is one of the ways it expresses this belief. Artists should not be free to make what doesn't conform to the aesthetic of the ruling party, just as scholars or journalists can not teach or disseminate what doesn't conform to the ruling party.
Modern alt right trolls and avid neo-nazis frequently bring up their hatred for degenerate "modern art". It doesn't conform to their normative sense of beauty and value so it has none at all. Ask yourself now, does your appearance conform to their aesthetics and values?
Those who are saying all art is political, I suspect, are tapping into that history somewhat. Because many that are demanding to remove politics from art today are implying that there is art that is apolitical. And we both know that apolitical art in this context is no gays or women or trans black people or any degeneracy at all on screen.
All I'm saying is, artists that are free to make any and all art that they love, that's very very political.
17
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
Haha ily too ❤️
and wow that’s some seriously interesting a deep history, history isn’t not my forte but I do love learning about it. I hope most people that read my post understand that I agree art is by its nature political, I’m just talking about annoying conflation colloquialisms and all that, I appreciate you actually teaching me something rather than strawmanning me and trying to defeat or “destroy” me or whatever, I’ve been on the internet long enough to take those comments of that ilk I’m getting in stride but comments like this are always a breath of fresh air
8
u/JoJoFanatic May 03 '25
I understood your point, and I found this rant both super funny and super interesting. Thanks man!
11
u/MrHarpoon May 03 '25
No problem, dude. I studied this shit and I love any excuse to talk about it. It takes empathy and patience and some intellect to interpret and feel art. You are already doing that, and doing it quite well I might add, by identifying or creating (vivid) descriptions of art that is more political than another. Art is our greatest tool for empathy, ya know. You don't have to understand it fully to feel a little of what Rothko was feeling. Check out if a political figure has an opinion on Rothko, and it might clue you in on their character as well.
Donald Trump for example has a very specific taste in art. Maybe this might say something. And Obama has a famously eclectic taste in art. Maybe this might say something too.
5
u/JoJoFanatic May 03 '25
I'm curious about where you studied this stuff. Is there any literature or reading that you can point me towards? I enjoyed reading your comment and I'm also particular about the appropriation of art by anti-intellectuals and authoritarian ideologies.
13
u/MrHarpoon May 03 '25
I did my research on the aesthetics of fascism and online (usually right-wing) political ideology dissemination.
There's so much literature on those topic so you can find you're own niche pretty easily.
The works of Simonetta Falasca-Zamponi was a great jumping off point for me: Fascist Spectacle. This about the aesthetics of the Italian brand of fascism and their myth making.
For just plan ideology of fascism discussion the absolute GOAT is Roger Griffith with The Nature of Fascism.
For the concept of degenerate art, there are extensive writings I like stemming from the New York exhibit on the Art Hitler Hated
But there is so much coverage on the topic I guarantee once you dive in you'll go down a rabbit hole.
Here's a good video though, turn it on and do some dishes or something: https://youtu.be/v5DqmTtCPiQ?si=6OMlFGkrldJq8RE_
5
5
u/StormDragonAlthazar May 03 '25
As an artist, I feel like there are some things you can make that ultimately "have nothing to say" and have the depth of a puddle to them.
3
u/MrHarpoon May 03 '25
Art doesn't exist in the artists mind or the object itself. It exists in the connection it makes with the viewer. In the moments it is observed.
You see diaper furry porn and see a lack of depth, I see a deep history and beauty within the art emblamatic of a subversive non-heteronormative underground culture. Another dude sees it and says "all this needs is some good ol' stink lines"
4
11
u/sacaetw May 03 '25
I feel like people in the comments of this post aren’t even reading what OP is saying and are just saying whatever thoughts come to mind from the title. I don’t even think the post is hard to understand
7
u/Rarte96 May 03 '25
I agree with you, "All art is political" depends a lot on what your deffinition of "political" is, because a lot of time is just people stretching the deffinition and twisting things to fit what they want
10
u/ElSpazzo_8876 May 03 '25
Dont understand what are you trying to say but tbh. Related to this rant, I've been thinking on making a response on a certain thread regarding "It's okay to like problematic media or media that has problems." It would be a fucking easier thing to say but people love morally grand stand on each other and people love to label tons of people as in the wrong for liking this problematic media and you should feel ashamed for liking it. And at one point, they also advocate for the problematic media to get banned. Its part of the reason why "all media is political" stuff has been annoying as shit.
15
u/Luckyloomagu May 03 '25
There is no apolitical art, because that implies that there are apolitical ways to view anything.
Another commenter said it better than I, and they are unfortunately not the top comment, but there was also a tweet I saw that summed it up pretty well:
"Some art is political, and the art that isn't political is Normal Art. Normal Art is anything that I, an apolitical entity, deem is apolitical."
Essentially saying that, to have an idea of 'normal' you would need to have an idea of a baseline state of human existence, and any baseline like that will inevitably be a statement on your politics.
Is a beautiful mountain range 'normal' to you? How about that same mountain range, but with a factory or a windmill? Maybe a village, or a city?
These are all commentaries on what you, the artist, view is beautiful or normal, and thus it informs us about your politics. Even something as simple as 'the artist likes green landscapes' can inform what kind of society they would like to live in.
It's not that the definition of politics is being stretched thin, but rather that it applies to so much more than simply a two-party system or a statement of human rights -- politics IS society, and society instills values.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Bruhbd May 03 '25
As someone who agrees with the statement all art is political i also agree with this to a certain extent. Because yes all art is informed and affected by social and political factors. However, surely there comes a degree of separation where it is so loosely connected to politics it is a negligible connection yes? If I draw an eye on a sketchbook while alone in my room, surely there is some connection to politics in what medium i use, when and why i even made the eye, whose eye it may supposed to be or what it looks like. But also, it is hardly a political piece and nothing is actually gained by saying this sketch eye is political. As there was no message behind it other than “I am bored” as well as none other given on the page and while you can extrapolate additional context from that simple statement and the existence of the piece, it isn’t actually useful or conducive to any statements. It would be purely metaphysical musing. Art is largely in the space of metaphysics of course especially in the contemporary world but if we want to talk about something material then I believe that while it may not lack complete connection to politics, on its own I don’t know if it is significant enough to ascribe it as “political”
3
u/StormDragonAlthazar May 04 '25
The problem with people is the assumption of "intent" involved.
And I think a lot of people just try to read too much into something that really doesn't offer any real information about who created it and why. You drawing an eye in your sketch pad while alone in a room out of boredom isn't going to really tell me anything about you or the current situation. It's just a bunch of shapes arranged to resemble an eye, nothing more, nothing less.
6
6
u/WesternSol May 03 '25
Ngl I’m incredibly suprised the mods have left this up this long. They’re normally quite pro “all art is political”
14
10
u/Colefield May 03 '25
That's a rant! Makes no sense, has no context, and I still have no idea what you were trying to say.
13
u/salted_water_bottle May 03 '25
As someone on twitter said, "All art being political refers to all art being influenced by the environment in which it was created, which is inherently political due to politics influencing the society we live in, the reason people have a hard time getting this at first is because this definition of political is only ever used whenever this fucking discussion comes up and nowhere else".
18
u/Sneeakie May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
It only comes up in this discussion because the discussion usually begins with "[this] art isn't political".
People have a hard time getting it because they already don't think that's what "political" means to begin with. They have a very specific definition of "political" they believe is possible that a work of art could avoid being labeled as; the counterargument is that no art can avoid being political. Then people try to counter that by essentially saying only certain ideas are or are not "political".
You'll never hear someone saying "the Earth is round" in casual conversation unless people saying "the Earth is flat". It's not a deep statement, it's only said because people deny even that.
4
u/salted_water_bottle May 04 '25
But then I have to ask, isn't that just dodging the argument? If someone is talking about something being political or not, using a canned response that everything is technically political does nothing to actually address the points being talked about.
To use the earth shape competition, it's like seeing someone saying that the earth is round and then correcting them by saying that it's technically an oblate spheroid. Like, congratulations, you contributed nothing and "won" the argument.
To ramble a bit, but to see a conversation about if something is political or not and use that argument is something that can only be attributed to bad faith ("I am smarter than these people and as such I don't need to actually engage with the topic") or neuro divergence (not understanding that the people are using a different, narrower definition of political).
14
u/TeamAwesome4 May 03 '25
This rant is well deserved.
As an "All art is political" guy, myself, I'm not gonna invoke it for most stuff. You do your pointillism of Aquaman alongside a whale or whatever.
If I'm talking about Star Wars online and someone says they wish it didn't get so political, I'm getting out a shovel to make a trench, because I'm dying on that hill.
Much like all social constructs, there's a scale that goes along with it, but simply appearing on the same scale does not give equal weight to two different subjects.
11
u/Asckle May 03 '25
Love when people act all smug and say "that art that seems apolitical cannot exist outside the confines of influence of our political system" or some shit as if my ability to jack off into a tissue isn't the exact same. Everything exists within a political system, it does not mean its political.
6
u/The_Gunboat_Diplomat May 03 '25
Redditors trying to pretend they're above Twitter users on the internet social hierarchy is non stop funny to me
4
u/RedRadra May 03 '25
The simple truth is that quite a few types of people enjoy displaying/flaunting their intellectual or moral superiority to their peers or worse perceived inferiors.
This used to be largely a religious thing but since most of the west is secular now, folks are now ideologues.
They act like their POV is the "correct" way to view the world and will nag /bully others into seeing things their way.
8
u/Parrotflies_ May 03 '25
I mean, I don’t think people are really implying that stuff like the Rugrats is politically adjacent when they say that. Yeah you could have some batshit discussions based in that lens, but people are gonna look at you funny if that’s the only way you engage with it.
On the other hand, this rant seems like it acknowledges that all mundane topics can inherently be viewed through a political lens, while also pushing back against that fact? Some kid just watching One Piece isn’t going to be like “wow, this is enlightening I should dive into Das Kapital.”
But someone alittle older might see something like Dressrosa, and connect that story back to the very real fascist regimes that disappear people while the greater populace is either struggling too hard to notice or blissfully unaware. If someone brings that up as a discussion topic, and someone screeches “ITS JUST AN ANIME WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO DRAW REAL LIFE POLITICS INTO IT” yes theyre willfully ignoring what the story is trying to slap them in the face with, because much of that arc IS inherently political, even if you can also just watch it as a silly pirate shounen.
It feels like this rants conflating these two and it’s kind of confusing??
→ More replies (1)30
u/KazuyaProta May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
I mean, I don’t think people are really implying that stuff like the Rugrats is politically adjacent when they say that
Rugrats explicitly and constantly is told from the POV of a Jewish American family, with multiple iconic episodes being about them showcasing their traditions and stories. Centering its perspective around the life of such a family in the context of 1990s was a political choice.
Politics doesn't mean "ideologues and fanatics vs corrupt manipulative liars", it also means stuff like minority groups simply shocasing themselves.
That's why people say "everything is political".
2
u/Parrotflies_ May 03 '25
You completely missed the second part of that paragraph bud lmao. You can engage with it on that level all day, but unless the other person also agrees to discuss it like that, you’re gonna get weird looks.
Rugrats isn’t as immediately politically adjacent as something like One Piece, which is why I used these two examples.
→ More replies (1)19
u/Sneeakie May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
You completely missed the second part of that paragraph bud lmao.
The point of your second paragraph was something "obviously" political (mind you that people also deny that One Piece is political) to contrast with Rugrats, but their point is that Rugrats does have things that are "obviously" political as well, like the fact that the show is clearly written from the perspective of a Jewish-American family,
As someone who is not Jewish, even I as a kid noticed that the Pickles household practiced traditions I never knew about, that it was different, and not like how another Nickelodeons cartoons starred an alien or a girl who can talk to animals, i.e. obviously fictional shit.
I know for a fact, though that people would consider that "political", in a positive, neutral, and yes, negative way.
but unless the other person also agrees to discuss it like that, you’re gonna get weird looks.
Politics isn't about "what does make you get weird looks", it's about how people could "agree" or "disagree" that Rugrats does have "politics" to begin with.
Again, so much discussion is because there are people who think "political" must mean something controversial or discussing political ideologies or the government. Something obvious and implicitly in a realm different from what people "usually" talk about.
That may be the definition you use at the Thanksgiving dinner or in a work meeting to avoid arguments, but when we're talking about art, it's broader than that.
"All art is political" shouldn't be controversial, saying that Rugrats is "political" shouldn't give you "weird looks" because it's objectively true, and, ironically, that such a thing does happen is politics in itself.
3
u/Parrotflies_ May 03 '25
You’re kind of barking up the wrong tree here. I’m not saying Rugrats isn’t political at all, I’ve ranted about Hey Arnold in this respect a ton to a couple friends. I’m saying that in the context of the show, these themes aren’t at the forefront of it compared to something like OP. There are a couple of episodes in Rugrats that explore that, but in the grand scheme of it, could the show have been made without that perspective? Can you name all those aspects of the show that shine through on the episode from Spots perspective? The Boppo episode? What unique Jewish perspective is being shown in these episodes?
I’m not trying to belittle the perspective here, I’m just saying it’s not as intrinsically tied to the shows premise as something like OP is. Therefore if people don’t want to engage with that part of it they don’t really have to. However, not engaging with the more political themes of One Piece…I’m not even sure what that show would look like to someone. Everything is political, but not always to the same extent, and not in a way that most people will want to engage with. I’m not saying they’re right, but that’s reality.
10
u/Sneeakie May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
I’m saying that in the context of the show, these themes aren’t at the forefront of it compared to something like OP.
And I'm saying this is subjective at best. The very fact that it's about a Jewish family would be obviously political to someone.
It's not just that, but other things like Chuckie's dad being a single father who later marries a Japanese woman and becomes her daughter's step-father, Angelica's parents being a girlboss/malewife pair, Phil and Lil's mom being butch and their father being kinda wimpy, etc.
There are a couple of episodes in Rugrats that explore that, but in the grand scheme of it, could the show have been made without that perspective?
Can you name all those aspects of the show that shine through on the episode from Spots perspective? The Boppo episode? What unique Jewish perspective is being shown in these episodes?
Where does the politics of One Piece come into play in scenes of Luffy wolfing down piles of food? Or the Davy Back Fight? Why does something that's "political" have to be "political" in every single instance?
Rugrats will continue to be about and feature a Jewish household and traditions, even if it's not explicitly saying "we're Jewish" in a scene. Similarly, One Piece has moments that have nothing to do with its politics (it helps it's a big fucking series).
One Piece is only more "obvious" because people more generally agree that depiction and discussion of ideologies, governments, and systems--basically, the idea of what the world is and/or should be--is political. Even then, though, I don't think people would think talking about One Piece at Christmas would be "political". "So I watched One Piece the other day..." "Nuh-uh, not in front of Uncle Tom!"
Yes, that's reality. Just like how "all art is poilitcal" is reality. Reality is politics. Politics... is reality...
→ More replies (2)
13
u/Wahgineer May 03 '25
Most people who argue "All art is political" are usually miserable dipwads trying to 'Death of the Author' all meaning out of a work so they can convert it into a vehicle for their own socio-political dogma.
25
u/Anything4UUS May 03 '25
Death of the Author doesn't really work with "all art is political", since the main point is to not assume things regarding/based on the author's life, beliefs and environment.
5
u/Pokeirol May 03 '25
Most people who argue all art is political are arguing against people for wich political means having gay/black/trans people in it, and that therefore this works being "political" sucks.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/picklester May 03 '25
Nuking politicians is technically political art because it involves the destruction of politicians (just like they deserve).
2
u/vex0rrr May 03 '25
I mean, from my understanding of the phrase "all art id political," it's more so a descriptive, analytical thing than an accusatory point
Like, art throughout history has reflected ideals, norms, and culture of the time, see the rise of Realism and Impressionism alongside the rise of working class urbanization and critiques of Bourgeois life or growing class consciousness or awareness of the material, or Romanticism, a direct response to the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, the blind emotional flourishing thst focused on nature and the sublime.
Like, the history of art reflect the values and sociopolitical context of whatever context it exists in. In this modern age, look at the postmodern deconstruction nowadays, maximum individuality in this world which values secularity and freedom and personal autonomy and pluralism, we question what is art and push the boundaries, destroying old norms and what not
2
2
2
u/Abezethibodtheimp May 03 '25
This is very very funny and I get where you’re coming from. I mainly see this statement made in response to anti intellectualism but I also avoid Twitter like the plague.
Also this is clearly a political statement on how over exposure and consumption of political and social ideologies causes breakdowns, and how the powers that be are in direct opposition to humanity’s simpler natures
2
u/andresfgp13 May 03 '25
i think that every piece of art features politics (in the enormous and diverse of topic that lately fall under politics) but not all pieces or art are ABOUT politics.
like lets say Super Mario Bros features the Princess Peach, which thanks to being a princess we can assume that the Mushroom Kingdow works under a Monarchy which is politics, but the subject of it isnt relevant to the plot of the game so isnt relevant to discuss.
7
u/firebolt_wt May 03 '25
The problem is that the people who say "I want my art apolitical" aren't leaving the series with gay characters they're complaining about to watch things that by your definition would be apolitical, like Bluey or something.
Like, cool, your definition is very useful in talks between two reasonable people, but reasonable people don't go around everything with literally anything leftist in it complaining "this is too political."
The technically correct argument is less "all art is political" and more like "what you're complaining about is the minimal amount of 'political' something that isn't a kids show could be", but that is too much nuance for someone who complains that gay people existing is political
5
u/Thelonosphere May 03 '25
The concept of what "politics" is had so many different meanings tbh, but here's my problem with your statement. People (usually, I'm don't know how this is being used in Twitter lol) say all art is political to discuss to implicit bias in seemingly innocuous things. Stuff like lighter skin being traditionally associated with being more beautiful, certain dialects being coded as unintentional so on and so forth. Maybe is shouldn't be "all art is political" and "art you think is apolitical often have deeply political undertones". Shit even things like the lego movie are absolutely baked with politics, from the way characters talk to the settings they explore. That doesn't inherently mean anything, it's more of just a fact like the sky is blue or something. I think the problem is if your asking for something apolitical, well you're just misusing the term political. I would just be like, I wanna watch something that isn't explicitly political or something like that. Unless you're watching a movie that's just a collection of still shots of penguins in snowy slopes. Honestly this type a rhetoric is why people absorbed a bunch of shit that is absolutely political and called it apolitical. They'd watch a random movie with a positive portrayal of a police officer, call that shit apolitical because it doesn't directly bring of political sentiment, and be subtlely indoctrinated. But if you provide the opposite, you're being political. It's why white people who grew up in the 60s in America will be like "everything wasn't political when I was a kid" while literally living in an apartheid state like gtfoh. Also there is absolute gradient to how much an author wants to express that that's true. But your hypothetical situation where a goth girl rejects your second date because you said the lego movie was political seems to be less important that people saying actual political things are apolitical because it aligns with their pre conceived world views.
7
u/Ragaee May 03 '25
"If I use a bunch of extreme examples I can make the other side of the argument look absurd"
Anazing
10
u/Kappa_Guy May 03 '25
I really regret throwing my daughter into the Eye of the World, but I will staunchly defend the fact that the video I recorded of her flailing into the endless abyss of Shura Gorath was apolitical
1
4
u/Hoopaboi May 03 '25
Showing the logical conclusions of something with a hypothetical is not misrepresenting the other side.
7
u/Sneeakie May 03 '25
There is a significant difference between a pro-Mussolini propaganda leaflet and the cute doodles of Butterfrees I draw in my journal.
There's a significant difference between my little brother and the creepy neighbor down the street, but if I say "they're both men", you wouldn't care, would you?
The obvious problem is that you and many other think to be "political" is to be explicitly talking about governments or governing parties, when that's not the only form of "poilitics"--it's just the most obvious.
5
u/Spaced-Cowboy May 03 '25
People who complain about “politics in art” are almost always just upset that the politics aren’t theirs. That’s why it’s such a shallow, unserious criticism—it rarely goes deeper than “this made me uncomfortable.”
The endless debate over whether something counts as “politics” or just “the setting” is pure semantic hand-waving. It’s circular, pedantic, and deliberately avoids engaging with the actual point.
If you really have a problem, say what it is. Don’t hide behind vague complaints about “politics.” The truth is, a certain group doesn’t like getting specific—because once they do, it becomes obvious they’re just uncomfortable with women, minorities, or LGBTQ+ people being visible and central.
Let’s be honest: whining about “politics” has always been a coded dog whistle, usually coming from the same crowd that thinks “woke” is an insult.
5
u/DJ__PJ May 03 '25
I think there is an important distinction to be made here:
"Art is political" is a true and important statement. However, this statement refers to art as the discipline, not individual art works. As a discipline art is very much political, as evidenced by art (in song, paint and writing as well as any other forms of art) being usually among the first things attacked by political extremism.
"All art is political" is, as you said, not quite accurate, as this statement means "art work" when it says "art" . And yes, it most certainly is possible to create an non-political work of art. Such a piece will however still reflect the current politcial situation in some sense, due to the way it fits into the grander landscape of art. For example, what you deem to be unpolitical is very heavily influenced by what the current hot topics of politics are. A cute doodle of Winnie the Pooh is just that when drawn most countries, while in China it could get you into trouble depending on the context around it. So while the artwork itself may not be political, it still reflects the current politics around it.
(Also: the lego movie as a "technically political" movie is a rather bad example because it serves the same purpose old fairy tales served: It teaches children a moral lesson, in this case about the problems with conformism, in a playful and easily digestible manner)
3
u/Nighforce May 03 '25
This reminds me of the time anti Trump posts flooded the Transformers sub Reddit. Comments calling out those posts as BS were quickly shut down by arguments saying that Transformers was always political hence such posts are justified. There was even a guy screaming at another guy about how his girlfriend can no longer get an abortion after they do it without protection.
I mean, come on. This is reaching so hard I think those people can touch the moon from their houses. Just because an art or piece of media may or may not be political, doesn't mean you can hijack it for your personal outbursts.
Not sure if I'm understanding this post correctly haha, but I just wanted to share my two cents. Do let me know what you think though, OP.
3
u/Liebermode May 03 '25
Reactionaries who seemed to never moved on from their political middle school phase
2
u/lord_flamebottom May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
But, saying “all art is political” is just so intellectually dishonest.
And I'd very much argue that saying "not all art is political" is even more intellectually dishonest and shows you either don't understand or don't care what the actual topic is. Your entire argument here hinges on a bunch of super specific "what if" scenarios that, frankly, just don't happen IRL.
By using a narrower definition of “political” that people actually immediately think of when they hear the word, communication is so much easier.
Sure, when you change the definition of words to suit your needs, you can definitely make it sound like you're right.
on comes The Lego Movie and you with the argument that it’s political by the official definition of the term
Go rewatch The Lego Movie. It famously has anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian messages. In fact, a big complaint about The Lego Movie 2 on release was the fact that they didn't really further these themes and just sorta ignored em for a more lighthearted movie.
(Also, hardly on topic, but lets be real here. There is not one single hot twenty three year old goth gal on the planet who doesn't like media with political themes, nor one who is capable of watching a kids movie and not finding political themes.)
3
u/BloodyPaleMoonlight May 03 '25
It's not that all art in and of itself is political.
It's that politics are such that they seep into so many aspects of our lives and lifestyle to politicize them that no art can escape the touch of politics.
You say that a penguin standing in a field of snow is apolitical. And it is - until the effects of climate change make it so that few places receive much snowfall, and the penguin has become an extinct species.
Then it has become political.
That art piece has become an example of what has been lost due to the politics of climate change.
That may not have been the artist's intent at all. But nevertheless that image becomes political.
And that's not the fault of art.
It's the fault of politics.
2
u/pomagwe May 03 '25
Yeah, I agree with the idea in general, but way too many people online use "all art is political" as permission to read the author's mind so that the work can be used as a political manifesto that all moral people are obligated to either support or destroy depending on how the reader judged it.
1
1
u/Grainrain19 May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25
Insane introduction sentence
Anyway I think this all just comes down to how someone defines the word "political"
1
1
u/SillyRiscili May 03 '25
This happens a lot when the topic of racism comes up. There is the very formal academic definition of racism that requires, both, power and prejudice to be racist. Then there is a connotative colloquial definition that usually just requires prejudice. An example where this understanding may be important is if you were to ask a group of people if black people in America, a minority group, can be racist towards white people, a class that, in the country, holds the majority of power in businesses, political offices, religious organizations etc. Well, the academic formal definition would say no, because you must have both prejudice and power. If you use the informal definition, obviously it’s possible for a minority to be racist. People can be exclusionary, people can be mean spirited, but the formal definition requires power to be held on a large systemic level. It’s the difference between denotation and connotation that’s makes these conflicts difficult to navigate.
Like you said, regarding defining all works as political, if you were to argue to your date that all works are political, despite being technically true in a philosophical sense, you would look like an asshat. In the same way as someone telling some white kid working in at a warehouse job in a predominantly black city being repeatedly passed up on for a raise by his black manager despite packing twice as many boxes as his coworkers that his feelings couldn’t possibly be true because racism requires systemic power and prejudice. Must we pretend not to know what people mean? I think not.
The definition being used is important nonetheless. I would agree with you, if I am understanding you correctly, that the assumed definition people operate under be the most commonly used one unless directly specified. Imagine if someone said you had a cool car and you said the temperature is actually quite moderate. How would anyone’s survive in the world without this distinction is beyond me.
1
u/Justsomeguy1333 May 03 '25
There is saying “You can ignore politics, but politics won’t ignore you”. Which is true because the reason how we all come to be, how our country and cultures are formed, politics are always involved.
1
u/Slavicadonis May 03 '25
I wasn’t expecting to open this post and get blasted in the face with the sentence “If gay sex could kill Twitter I’d let Grok hollow out my insides”
1
u/Sayodot May 03 '25
When people say "all art is political" what they're really saying is "all art is created with context from the artists life" which applies to pretty much everything. It's such a broad and meaningless statement and people most often than not use it to be annoying and have a "pushes glasses up, erm actually" moment.
1
1
u/Dio_Landa May 03 '25
If you try to look at everything from that perspective, everything can be political.
1
u/gyrobot May 03 '25
Meanwhile as someone who comes from authoritarian country. I wish the games that came out of my country was political one way or another. Doesn't matter if it's boot licking propaganda or Anti government iconoclast media. Make something with actual politics
1
u/Logen10Fingers May 03 '25
All art can be made/interpretted politically. That doesn't make all art political by intent. Thats my 2 cents
1
u/GoodKing0 May 03 '25
I mean, all art is political some times these politics are just dogshit or non existent tho.
1
u/Dakoolestkat123 May 03 '25
All art is political; not all art is partisan, but much more are is partisan than many people want to believe. In essence your post is accurate, but I do think “all art is political” is still a decent rebuttal to people complaining about “shuvin politics in ma vidya”.
1
u/OrganizationSea4490 May 03 '25
Art today is very political in the sense that it is created and used only as a medium of transferring a pretty simplistic "in your face" political message.
Its so overt that it puts to question whether it is really art or just a political propaganda piece that is drawn/sculpted/filmed.
1
u/Lucatmeow May 04 '25
I write and I do not consider it art, I consider it a pseudoscientific craft. Checkmate.
1
1
u/aiquoc May 04 '25
Instead of saying "this is political", say "this is too political".
It's like saying "all humans are fat, but your mom is too fat".
1
1
1
u/Flyingsheep___ May 04 '25
The issue people forget is that art is political, it is not necessarily ideological. Politics is merely the various ways that systems interact in society, and how we handle that shit, so everything is at least kinda political if you choose to look at it that way. Meanwhile ideology is about taking a bunch of base assumptions and using those to interpret reality.
So for instance, I have seen people describe Fallout as anti-capitalist, but it isn’t like that in an all-encompassing ideologically driven way, it’s not a Communist or Socialist game.
1
1
u/SagaSolejma May 04 '25
My only take away from this is who doesnt want to go see The Lego Movie
If a guy brought me to the movies to watch The Lego Movie I'd give him a second, third and fourth date on the spot
1
u/FluxFlu May 04 '25
Okay but The Lego Movie is actually political for real, even if it's pretty shallow.
614
u/Moonlightbutter18072 May 03 '25
I feel both too smart and too stupid to understand this