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.