Please Don’t Mix Art with Politics
Please Don’t Mix Art with Politics
Well, Gargi disagrees! In this article Gargi underlines the importance of Art in Politics and why Art and artists must engage with politics.
"Please don't mix art with politics"—a statement as naive as it is dangerous. Art isn't some detached, lofty pursuit floating above the realities of life. Art is a mirror of society, shaped by the very political forces that govern our existence. When society flourishes, art thrives. When society rots under oppression, art becomes a weapon, a voice for the silenced. To separate art from politics is to strip it of its power, to render it impotent.
The Unbreakable Bond Between Art, Society, and Politics
Art does not emerge from a vacuum. It is forged in the crucible of societal conditions, molded by the political climate of the time. In periods of peace and prosperity, art often reflects beauty, innovation, and hope. But in times of turmoil, oppression, and injustice, art transforms into a fierce critique, a rallying cry, a symbol of resistance.
Look at the ancient Indian epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. These were not mere stories; they were blueprints for governance, guides for moral conduct, deeply intertwined with the political and social fabric of their time. Art was politics, and politics was art.
Art as a Weapon in the Indian Independence Movement
During India's struggle for independence, art was not a passive observer—it was an active participant, a force of defiance. Across the nation, artists, playwrights, and musicians used their craft to awaken the masses, ignite the flames of nationalism, and challenge the British Empire head-on.
Revolutionary Literature and Music
Rabindranath Tagore and Bankim Chandra Chatterjee didn't just write; they ignited revolutions. Tagore's "Jana Gana Mana" became the anthem of a free India, while Chatterjee's "Vande Mataram" echoed through the streets as a rallying cry for freedom. These works weren't separate from politics; they were the heartbeat of the independence movement.
Theatre as the Battlefield
In Maharashtra, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar turned Natya Sangeet into a weapon of resistance. His plays, drenched in patriotic fervor, delivered revolutionary ideas to the masses, camouflaged as entertainment. Meanwhile, the Tamasha folk theater was repurposed to expose the brutal realities of colonial rule, stirring the rural populace to action.
The Bengal famine of 1943, one of the darkest chapters of British rule, sparked powerful artistic responses. Playwrights like Bijon Bhattacharya used theater to bring this tragedy to light. His play "Nabanna" (New Harvest) was a searing indictment of the British policies that led to the famine, portraying the suffering of millions with raw intensity. Nabanna was more than just a play—it was a call to arms, awakening the conscience of a nation and fueling the desire for freedom. Another powerful play, "Kallol" by Utpal Dutt, similarly depicted the horrors of the famine, stirring the emotions of its audience and laying bare the cruel indifference of the colonial regime.
In Southern India, theater companies like the Madurai Original Boys Company in Tamil Nadu took the stage as soldiers of freedom. Their plays, infused with nationalist messages, mobilized thousands against British tyranny. Even the traditional Kathakali in Kerala was transformed into a medium of political critique.
The Global Perspective: Art as a Global Revolutionary Force
The fusion of art and politics is not just an Indian phenomenon; it is a global truth. During the French Revolution, artists and writers didn't merely reflect the revolutionary spirit—they fueled it. Francisco Goya’s "The Disasters of War" wasn't just art; it was a damning indictment of political tyranny. Picasso’s "Guernica" was not just a painting; it was a scream against the horrors of war, a direct blow to the political establishment.
In the United States, art was the lifeblood of the Civil Rights Movement. Songs like "We Shall Overcome" were not just melodies; they were anthems of defiance, catalysts for change. The visual arts and literature of the time didn't just document the struggle; they shaped it, pushed it forward.
The Peril of Divorcing Art from Politics
To say that art should be free from politics is to castrate it. Art without politics is a hollow shell, a decorative piece with no power, no purpose. Art, when engaged with the struggles and triumphs of society, becomes a force of nature. It challenges, it inspires, it disrupts. It has the power to topple empires and to build new worlds.
Conclusion: Artists Must Engage with Politics
"Please don't mix art with politics"—those who say this do not understand art. They fear its power. They want it tamed, docile, and impotent. But true art has never been and will never be tame. It is a weapon, a voice, a force that shapes history. Artists must embrace this power, not shy away from it. They must wield their art like a sword, cutting through the darkness and guiding society towards the light. The separation of art and politics is not just wrong; it is a betrayal of what art is meant to be.