By Charles Gaucher
The question of whether the artist is political is far from obvious. While some artists, through their thematic choices and the causes they support, directly engage in a political approach, others prefer to nuance this notion and see it more as a form of personal commitment.
Art is often a reflection of its time, and observing it allows for a confrontation with a message that is rooted in a specific temporal context. The 2023 exhibition of Dana Schultz at the Museum of Modern Art in Paris, for example, presented a contrasting picture of contemporary society, where political figures appeared in the form of characters. But can we truly describe her art as political? To answer this question of “is the artist political?”, several contemporary artists from the Parisian scene have shared their opinions on this complex term. The responses vary, and consensus is far from being reached.
Pauline d’Andigné, a young visual artist, believes that the artist, by their very action, is de facto political. In her view, art gives a voice within society. On the other hand, Feryel Atek, based in Marseille after spending a decade in Berlin, firmly adopts a political approach. Her art aims to raise awareness about specific societal issues. “Every action, every posture, the way you choose to move, to eat, how you approach your profession, your social interactions—it’s all political,” she tells us. The political dimension of art thus appears as an overall attitude, present at every stage of an artist’s life, or even of anyone’s life.
However, Sarah Valente, artist represented by the Romero Paprocki gallery in Paris and founder of the Greenline Foundation, which supports forest protection through part of the proceeds from her art sales, prefers to clarify that what she advocates is primarily a commitment rather than a political stance. According to her, the artist takes a position through their actions, but this does not define them as political in the traditional left-right dichotomy. “I share my vision about a subject which is important to me, and everyone interprets it as they wish, feelings are beyond politics, because politics divide people but art and feelings can bring them together”, she explains, emphasising that art can be a vehicle for ideas without necessarily being linked to a particular political ideology.
These reflections shed light on how the term “political” can be experienced differently by artists. For some, it is a battleground where values and ideologies must clash. For others, art and politics do not necessarily intertwine explicitly, and the artist maintains their freedom of expression away from partisan concerns. Moreover, some artists, far from being comfortable with the idea of political involvement, prefer to keep their opinions private. Art, as a form of personal expression, can sometimes be perceived as a protected space where one chooses not to reveal ideological inclinations.
This dichotomy also raises a broader question about the place of art in contemporary society. While the collective artistic movements of the 20th century, often driven by shared ideals and political aims, have almost disappeared, each artist now appears more autonomous and influenced by a range of varied and personal sources. This growing individualisation reflects the evolution of society itself: an atomisation of concerns and practices. The artist today is no longer bound by commissions or ideological movements. They are free to choose the causes they wish to support, or to ignore them entirely.
Ultimately, politics in art only truly exists when an artist addresses a political subject explicitly, either through their works or as the theme of an exhibition. In this sense, the artist’s politics remain a matter of personal choice and individual approach. The term “political” thus transforms into a fluid category, depending on each artist’s level of commitment, and not on a universal definition. Each artist, depending on their practice, may or may not incorporate political dimensions into their work, but they are not necessarily defined by it.
The artist, in the end, chooses whether or not to position their work within a political framework. While some choose to engage with specific causes, others prefer to let their works speak for themselves, without being confined to a purely political vision. Art, while grounded in reality and current affairs, can transcend political contingencies while remaining a mirror of society and its multiple facets.