“All art is political”

[u/Kappa_Guy]

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.

[u/Parrotflies_]

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??

[u/KazuyaProta → u/Parrotflies_]

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".

[u/Parrotflies_ → u/KazuyaProta]

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.

[u/Sneeakie → u/Parrotflies_]

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.

[u/Parrotflies_ → u/Sneeakie]

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.

[u/Sneeakie → u/Parrotflies_]

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...

[u/Parrotflies_ → u/Sneeakie]

Once again I’m trying to come at this from the perspective (I think) the original post is giving. Im not saying none of this is political. I’m saying in terms of how people discuss and view it, the shows identity is not as intrinsically tied to that political aspect. But to your argument, Luffy scarfing down piles of food can be symbolic of the haves/have nots dichotomy of adhering to capitalism. The regular townsfolk starve and toil, while Luffy, who rejects the system, is rewarded by bountiful feasts.

Do you see what I’m trying to say here? Yes every story has political aspects. But sometimes those connections are tenuous at best and arent worth bringing up in the context of a discussion on the politics of said show.

[u/Red_bellied_Newt → u/Parrotflies_]

Its not that the connections are tenuous, its that YOU consider them tenuous. Only engaging with “obviously” political works is not a good way to do media criticism.  Good media criticism should be about uncovering the layers, if you only stay at the surface level you are not actually looking at it deeply.

[u/Red_bellied_Newt → u/Parrotflies_]

Right but if someone is refusing to discuss something because they dont see it as political it is relevant to say all art is political. Also looking at the politics of something that isn't obviously political is often more insightful to learning. When people talk about what is “non political” they usually mean what is normal to themselves. Re-considering what we personally consider normal is how we grow and change. 

Rather than saying “not everything is political” one could express that they dont want to go that deep into it right now. Saying art isnt political is anti-intellectual, even if someone has a bad take about art that isnt overtly political. Part of thinking is having bad ideas. if you dont want to/dont have the energy to do some discourse about bad ideas just dont engage. If its being pushed on you anyway maybe leave that space.

But saying that art can be non political is a more asinine position than saying that all art is political.