Week 2: Music as a form of Art

For this week’s blog post, I will be looking at the relationship between music and social critique. I think that music is one of the most sincere forms of art. Music is a universal language, in the fact that everyone can understand it. Music can be a very simple way to convey a complex idea, or it can be a complex way to convey a simple idea. Music is what you make of it. Music is possibly the greatest way to express one’s opinions. Take, for example, “Teenage Dream,” by Katy Perry. This song conveys that you can achieve happiness in a very specific way. The song talks about running away as a teenager with your lover, one of the lyrics used to describe it is “This is real, so take a chance and don’t ever look back.” This example of music is one that can be perceived in a positive or negative light, depending on the audience. Some people may agree, that this is the way to find happiness. Other’s may completely disagree, saying that as a teenager there is no way you can know what you want enough to make you truly happy. This is just Katy Perry’s way of expressing her opinions, which the audience can either agree with or disagree with.

            A great example of how music can be used as a social critique can be found in the songs “War Pigs” by Ozzy Osbourne and “Sleep Through the Static” by Jack Johnson. Both of these songs are protesting war. Osbourne’s song has lyrics such as:

Time will tell on their power minds

Making war just for fun

Treating people like pawns in chess

Wait ‘till their judgment day comes

Yeah

This segment of lyrics is talking about the politicians that start wars. He is using his song to convey a message to the public. The message is that the politicians starting wars do it for completely incorrect reasons, and that war is wrong. That is a way that he is able to critique the government. On the other hand, “Sleep Through the Static” has lyrics such as:

Well mighty mighty appetite

We just eat 'em up and keep on driving

Freedom can be freezing take a picture from the pretty side

Mind your manners wave your banners

What a wonderful world that this angle can see

After protesting Bush’s moves in Iraq and Afghanistan, Jack Johnson busts out with these lines. He is saying that although the United States of America seemed to free these people, we only see what’s being reported. We see the “picture from the pretty side.” Johnson is protesting false portrayal through the social media, a social critique. He could also be calling Americans to look more deeply into an issue before deciding which side they are on. He is probably saying that we need to do a thorough investigation in order to come to a fully informed conclusion.

            To wrap up, I think that music is definitely a valid form of art. I think that it can be used to express opinions as well as offer a critique of society.            

Video Games and their New Influence on Soeicety.

There has been a lot of fuss lately over the consideration of video games as a form of art.  Of course video games often incorporate visual art, which is later manipulated by code, but I'm talking about social art.  I tend to think of social art as the implicit conveyance of a message through catering to what entertains the human brain.

 In the beginning of the video game era,  it would be hard to argue that there was any message hidden within the incredibly simple mechanics.  Take centipede for example (For those of you who don't know: http://www.atari.com/arcade/arcade/centipede); centipede is essentially a game about killing a centipede before it reaches your small snake-headed ship and destroys you.  Now, of course that does imply that you are fighting for your survival, but it is mindless in every way possible.  I'm sure someone somewhere has drawn some parallel from this to the extinction of the human race, and the most motivated of hippies can probably find some kind of animal cruelty here, but the plain and simple truth is that it means nothing.  Centipede is just a game meant to entertain, it has about as much depth as any movie that Randy Couture has starred in.  Although games have come a long way, many still follow Centipede's methodology: there is no time to explain why or how you are battling this creature, just do it, and enjoy doing it.  The problem, and the root of all real controversy, are the games that do not follow this pattern.

There is so much controversy surrounding the fact that younger kids who have played violent video games are predisposed to violence themselves.  I do not entirely disagree with this.  Most of the most successful games are mindless, "Centipede style", where the consequences for your actions are negligible.  The true gems are the ones that make you think.  There are video games that make you treasure life so thoroughly you carry the message with you throughout the rest of your existence.  It is harder for me to talk about this than to just show you.  I will list a few examples of very powerful games that everyone needs to play.  Let me restate that EVERYONE NEEDS TO PLAY THESE GAMES, I don't care if you approach them with skepticism, I don't care if you have a heart of stone, these will move you.  The power of living the life of someone beset by a real human emotion will always outweigh the still portrait, it will always outweigh the well written essay, it is the most powerful form of simulated experience on this planet.

As for my list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_Hearts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_Hearts_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_X

If you have the patience to play through the whole Metal Gear series it will blow your mind.

These are priority recommendations, the list of greats is truly innumerable.

I would like to make the claim that video games are one of the most powerful forms of art possible.  Looking at a painting can speak to the heart for sure, but dynamically living the lifestyle of the portrayed..that is a true gift, and something only technology could deliver.  Just a few examples, and some of my favorite video games with meaning:

http://www.molleindustria.org/everydaythesamedream/everydaythesamedream.html
http://www.kongregate.com/games/2DArray/the-company-of-myself

Just play these things.  I cannot speak more highly of any form of entertainment.  Everydaythesamedream is a more philosophical game, and it is a social critique,  whereas the company of myself is just heartbreaking and fantastic.  If you are not moved by these games, it can only be that you have shut out the possibility of a video game invoking an emotional response, or you disagree with the message.  This is a characteristic of all modern art, the ability to be interpreted. 

Next to a human being, your best bet for true emotional connection is a video game.  Skeptics will always exist, but I challenge anyone to play through my list of recommendations and still contest this blog.

Art as a form of Social Critique

I feel that most people will agree with my view that art is open to a wide range of interpretation.  Works of literature, music, paintings, architecture, speeches, perhaps even video games can be interpreted as works of art to different people with a wide array of opinions.  Likewise, I think the same view can be applied to art that demonstrates social critique.  I believe any piece of “art”, to some extent, has the ability to successfully critique society.  Just as every person will have a different view on what art is, every person will also have a different definition of what qualifies as a social critique in art.  Basically, neither art nor the definition of social criticism is absolute, and it is up for each individual to interpret what they are viewing accordingly to their opinions.

            With that being said, I am going to talk about a piece of art that I believe does a successful job with social critique.

     This example of architecture used as a work of art that, I believe, was produced to relay a certain socially critical message to those who viewed it.  This piece of art shows what looks like some sort of political or government structured building seemingly being swallowed by the earth.  It actually is a library, and it is located right in front of the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne Australia.   I find it hard to believe that people would actually not, or refuse, to see the clear social critique that is used in this work of art. The first thing I thought of when analyzing this work of art was that it is trying to show how today’s society, whether it be the government, economics, justices (or injustices), etc., is literally ruining or “swallowing” the public good.  This can definitely, at least in my opinion, be defined as a social critique issue.

            When I began to look at this a little deeper, I began to think of what significance the building being a library has in regards to social criticism.   I began to look at this piece of architectural art to be demonstrating literature’s place, or lack thereof, in today’s society.  I got the idea that maybe the art was referring to literature because of the fact that the building being swallowed is, in fact, a library.   This fact could be a prime example of social critique because it could possibly be showing how the artist believes that the great literature that is often stored in a library is being swallowed by today’s society.  I immediately thought about censorship of books in schools today.  I know, at least where I’m from, that certain books are no longer allowed to be taught in schools because they are deemed inappropriate.  These books however, have been a critical part of getting society to where it is today, and by cutting them out of our education system, it is basically erasing a chapter of history.

            The last thing I want to question is: just because this work of art is located in another country, does that make my “American interpretation” wrong?  I believe that, even though it is in another country, that every person is free to interpret the art the way they want.  It might not be the way the artist intended it to be looked at, but that is the beauty of art, everybody’s interpretations of it can be right in some sense.

The distinction between containment and censorship.

Containment culture is a term too often thrown around in today's society.  Often times people assume that any form of censorship is a form of containment, without even first understanding what the word means in itself.   Containment is defined as : "A policy of checking the expansion or influence of a hostile power or ideology, as by the creation of strategic alliances or support of client states in areas of conflict or unrest."  I am highlighting the distinction between what qualifies as containment, and what qualifies as censorship.  Many people assume that censoring a piece of material counts as containment, or rather, people who are immediately affected by particular form of censorship believe it qualifies as containment.   This is simply not the case, believe me, I am one of the last people who will argue that censorship is a wholly good thing, but it is far too often categorized as a form of containment.

The true distinction is priority, any issue that has not yet had a concrete set of rules placed on it will fall under some form of censorship.  This is not done to aggravate the population, it is not done to defer responsibility to other parties, it is done simply to stall for time until a reasonable solution is found.   A reasonable solution would fall under the categorization of at least the majority of people supporting it.  The real problem is the amount of support behind an issue when it falls under the censorship category.  A censored issue rarely sees light until someone labels it as containment.  You don't see people today complaining that pornography should be on basic cable when there is something like the drinking age in question.  Both issues are on equal ground politically.  No matter how many arguments are made that the drinking age should be lowered to 18, generally using the argument of adulthood or the ability to be a soldier, the fundamental elements of both issues remain the same. 

What category do they respectively fall under?  After all, containment is the maintenance of an idea that  could later lead to unwanted results.  To me it seems as if the drinking age does not fall under this category.  Nobody argues for or against it in the sense that it is holding back the country; most people would agree that sober people tend to accomplish more, and as such it isn't a matter of national advancement.  But, it is a form of censorship, stifling the use of alcohol in general is.  It is keeping a potentially offensive item away from some subset of the population.  Younger kids have a harder time maintaining their composure when intoxicated, and the laws in this case seem to act in the defense of those who are not yet mature enough to realize what they are subjecting themselves to, and this is the true golden line.  Keeping people who do not "realize" what they are getting themselves into from inflicting harm upon themselves or others; the delivery mechanism of containment. 

Containment and Racism

The blog entry I read was: Racist cake has Swedish official in hot water

The Cold War era idea of containment culture is still alive in today’s age.  The blog post I read deals with the controversial piece of “art” that potentially put a Swedish official’s government position in jeopardy.  The piece of art was a cake shaped in the mold of the stereotypical body of a black woman.  The cake had the artist’s, Makode Aj Linde, head sticking out covered in a comical black mask.  People at the show, including Sweden’s Minister of Culture, Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, would go up and slice the cake in the genital region while Linde screamed out in comical pain.  Supposedly this was a racially derived piece of art representing female genital cutting, often referred to as female genital mutilation (FGM).  The only problem with this idea, is that Linde has not actually said what his art was representing, saying it was up to the audience’s interpretation.

            When forming their interpretations, have the audience considered the fact that the cake was representing Sarah "Saartjie" Baartman, the woman who was taken from Africa, brought to Europe and put on display because her body looked different than what European’s were used to seeing?  The Europeans literally contained Saartjie by gving her and English name, and humiliating her by forcing her to display her body to people.  Even after her death, her skeleton, brain, and genitals were kept on display.  By doing this to her, Europeans were not only containing Saartjie, but all African women- and men.  It was thought that all African women had that type of body, and because of that body, sex was all they were good at.  This helped enforce the European idea that Africans were savages and needed to be helped; which ultimately lead to colonization of Africa- another form of containment culture that I am not going to get into. 

            This leads into the idea of female genital mutilation being a form of containment as well.  The idea of FGM can be linked to containment culture by performing this procedure on women so that, on one hand, these women would not be so “sex craved.”  It could also be interpreted that the idea of FGM came to be well recognized as an African woman tradition because of Saartjie Baartman’s role in European society.  Since she was thought to be sexually promiscuous because of her body, and that stereotype was passed on to all African women, FGM may be performed as a direct effect of Saartjie in order to contain the woman’s sexuality.

And then we get to the issue of race, and racism.  The majority of the audience, as far as I have read, seem to interpret this piece of art as a work of racism.  Do these people realize that the artist, Linde, is actually biracial?  Historical, racism was used as a way to contain the “savage, uncivilized people” of Africa and place them in a group separate to the European and American civilizations.  Today, though arguably not as bad as then, racism still plays a major role in the containment.  Most people accept that race is merely just the color of ones skin, and nothing else.  However, racism is still used today as a way to contain and separate people on the basis of their skin’s color.  Today American society tends to view black people as being more dangerous and violent- more likely to be involved in gangs and more likely to commit a crime than white people.  Right, or wrong, as that assumption might be, the idea behind racism is to lump people together based on their physical characteristics and contain them to those misguided and unjust assumptions and stereotypes that are placed on them.

All three of the issues I mentioned could come together an form an interpretation not necessarily my interpretation- of what Linde was trying to prove with his “racist cake.”  By combining a little bit of important African history, the topic of FGM, and the issue of racism, the artist could, as well as addressing each topic individually, be addressing the issue of containment culture in today’s society.  While this interpretation will most likely not be agreed upon by many people, the artist himself did say that his work was open for the audience’s interpretation, and therefore, should be considered as an equally viable option.

Modern Containment/Resistance to Containment of Homosexuality

This week I am writing a blog about gay rights and how that is a prime current example of containment culture. I think what is happening right now is that the gay culture is being contained. I also believe that there are steps being taken to get it out of containment.

One example of gay culture still being contained today is found on the blog “Gay Rights Watch.” The specific post, “Court: ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Will Stay in Place,” aims to shame the Obama administration for keeping Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in place. The post is dated from July 11^th, 2011, so it is pretty recent. Disobeyers of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy can be penalized or discharged, based on the ruling of the court. Director of an Servicemembers united, organization specifically made for gay and lesbian troops and veterans, makes this comment about the policy: “The situation with finally ending this outdated and discriminatory federal policy has become absolutely ridiculous.”

Here it is easy to see that gay culture is being contained. The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy is that people who “demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts” should be barred from military service. It would be more understandable if it were only engaging in homosexual behavior that prohibited entry into the military, but here we see that even people with the natural inclination towards homosexuality are barred from service. I think that this is extreme containment. Openly homosexual individuals are not allowed to serve in the military! I think that people should be able to be honest about his or her sexual orientation. I am convinced that there is no policy barring people from talking about their heterosexual lives in the military. Why should it be any different for homosexuals? I think that they should have the same rights.

That is the negative containment of the homosexual culture. There is, however, a positive side to all of this. I believe that there is something to be said for homosexuality resisting containment as well. From the same blog, there is a post titled “CA: Senate Passes Bill Strengthening Parental Rights for Non-Biological Parents.” The point of this post is that the bill would protect both same-sex and opposite-sex couples with children. I think the coolest thing about this post is that we see same-sex and opposite-sex relationships being equated. Here they are actually equal to each other. This is resisting the containment felt by all homosexuals not too long ago. Finally our society is breaking down those barriers and we are becoming more accepting.

I think as a whole, we as a society have become more accepting of everything that has to do with LGBT. Sure, there have been a lot of instances where people will lash out at LGBT, but I think overall, the number of people who now accept this lifestyle is growing every day. I think that gay-straight alliances are really cool to see. It shows that heterosexuals can look at homosexuals as equals. They can both look at each other and leave each other alone. I think that’s a big step from where we as a society were just a little bit into the past.