Art and politics go hand in hand. They almost always have and most likely always will. What shocked me in this article was how influential the government was in the growth of this movement. I've always connected political cartoons or propaganda with sending a political message, but I never imagined that this movement was to send a message as well. I guess part of what made me so uneasy about this was that unlike a cartoon, or an add, these have much more hidden meanings. Without reading this article I would have been completely unaware of the situation. While people might have been aware that this was popular to follow, they might not have known what message was trying to be portrayed from the government. I was unknowing in that this "sponsorship" had even occurred, especially to the extent mentioned in the article. It was intriguing to read how the government took advantage of their situation, using the artists and their work as "useful pawns of US 'psychological warfare'". (Shark, 2) It was also interesting in that many artists appeared to have blindly agreed. Trading in their own personal ideas or opinions to please and succeed. The article mentioned that they were "Victimized by the use they were put to." (Shark, 4) I feel like art looses some of its truth and importance when it becomes watered down with a message the artist isn't fully aware of or behind. While I can see the importance and how there are positive collaborations between the government and art, this did not fit that description, in fact it was used to send an unspoken message, one overlooked by many.
Some of the facts in this article made me question and think about truth and truth in journalism. People get news and information through the work that journalists do, but what happens when these people change or edit information to create a more compelling story? Readers are left with a mix of uncertain facts, and misguided views. It would be very easy to write and edit a piece to fit your personal ideas or beliefs, and i think it's important, especially when writing on history, to just get the facts right. I was shocked at how harsh some of the language and metaphors were in this piece. Journalism can be an art form, as can writing, but it must be done properly. I feel that instead of coming out of reading this article completely filled in on the situation, I left with more doubts and questions than i started with. Just like with political art, journalism still should remain truthful to the readers. This idea of truth in writing began to make me wonder about art critics and critiques. We all have personal opinions and views,but it's especially important for people critiquing to do their best to remain unbiased. Bias can change a persons opinion of a piece, and can cause great art or artists to be overlooked or ignored due to poor critiques of the work.
While expressing your views is important, this becomes a slippery slope when it is connected to history or art. Lack or truth about a piece or ideas can be caustic to both viewers and artists. It's important that the boundaries aren't crossed too much between art and politics, to help art remain true to it's purpose. This reading on Abstract Expressionism really made me think about the history of art and the truths behind it.