Artist Questions - Responsibilities

Artists and Their Viewers 

1. What is the artist’s responsibility in making a work of art?

I believe the artist’s responsibility in creating a work of art would include a few ground rules that most all artists would agree upon.  Personally, I would have to say that originality is a huge part for the artist.  If an artist takes an idea or outright copies another artist that would be very disrespectful, for one, and illegal.  Regarding originality and Renzo Martens’ Enjoy Poverty, I think that it was a general idea but the execution of it is what took the cake.  The way that Martens included the neon light sign that stated “Enjoy poverty please” (even though I did not personally enjoy it) was quite original in its own respect.  Switching the scope to my project, I feel that I can possibly get onto a slippery slope of becoming too ironic or bringing the serious tones out of my project, thus making the video more of an advertisement or stereotypical piece of art.  Originality is key, otherwise pieces will not feel fresh and repeated. 

I think it is important for an artist to be intentional too, in more ways than one.  For one, they need to be intentional in their message with or without a disclaimer so to speak.  In both Martens’ and my project, I think that there is a pretty clear message and the intentions in our crafts are present and meaningful in their own respects.  Other than having a meaningful, intentional message, a huge responsibility is having intention in one’s ideas and execution of them.  A well thought out execution of material and mediums in the art world can make or break the meaning, story, and feel of a work of art. 

Lastly, it is extremely important for the artist to think about their viewers.  They should think about who is going to potentially see their work, how their messages are going to be perceived, and how they want the viewer to interact with the piece.  If an artist is not thinking about their viewer and/or aiming towards the incorrect audience, it is not going to be as meaningful or understood; and that is essential.  For me at least, I think that is what Martens’ documentary was lacking, it felt confused in who it was aimed for especially.  If a disconnect is created, the art is not living up to what it could truly be. 

2)   What is the responsibility of the viewer?

Much like the responsibility of the artist, there is a reflexive responsibility for the viewer as well.  I think that it is important for the viewer to treat an artist’s work with respect and not just “blow it off”, especially if the artist did everything in their power to reach their audience, express a message, and show their intentions well.  With all of those qualities, it is hard for a viewer to pass it up and not respect it anyhow.  For a viewer to give an art piece a chance and actually “read” it, it is responsibility enough for them.  It is when they perceive it and expand upon it that an interest is found in the art itself.  Regarding Martens’ and Mosse’s projects in the DRC, I would also say that it is important for the viewer to understand that Mosse and Martens did not, and do not want people to go there and actually do something directly.  They would rather bring the problem out of the shadows and into the minds of the masses.  Although the viewer does not have as many “responsibilities” as the artist per-say, it is important for them (the viewers) to realize that the art is put out there by the artist and it should be treated with respect for what it is worth (intrinsically and monetary).