Wednesday, March 25, 2015

The gun

David Mamet brings up a valid point about the art of entertainment. I'd have to agree that in the end the audience is going to quickly pick up on weather or not they are being manipulated. A show, movie, or play with an agenda will quickly be shoved away by all who do not agree wholeheartedly with what it is saying, and even those who agree might be turned away. We've all experienced "preachy" art. Marmet is saying that it's not meant to invoke social change but to entertain and nothing more.

 I understand that those who go to create drama with the goal of changing hearts assumes the moral high ground typically. What he's saying about how the purpose of art is to entertain and solely to entertain is something I don't agree with. While that's typically it's main use. While social change is more powerful in the hands of a courageous man or woman, art is important to reveal the change. Art is also meant to reveal the world in a light audiences might not have seen. It's to show a new view a different perspective. Not to manipulate them into believing something new but to state something for them to decide what to do with it. Leave it in their hands and trust a message to either die or thrive within them. Art is to entertain but also to reveal.

No comments:

Post a Comment