Can we hold artists responsible for their actions in sensitive political and social situations?

Before and after the February 1979 revolution, discussions were raised about the role of art and literature and their responsibility in society. What was approved and accepted by revolutionary and leftist forces was referred to as committed art. This perspective was even accepted and embraced by the “Maktabi” forces affiliated with the Islamic Republic government. The use of art and literature in achieving ideological and governmental goals paved the way for new discussions. These discussions and debates generally questioned the idea of free art and put committed art under scrutiny, meaning that art should be free from any restrictions. With this approach, a significant portion of intellectuals suddenly turned to theorizing and explaining the reasons for free art.

And now for years, intellectuals, analysts, and researchers of the political and social issues of our society have been evaluating committed art, revolutionary art, and responsible art with government and ruling constraints in response to a very simple and fundamental question of “the role of art” in a confused, irresponsible, and apathetic manner. They interpret it as a means of making money and at best, with a reliance on the independence of art, they turn it into neutral and decorative elements; with the belief that committed art means art in bondage, restricted art, and art imprisoned by buttons and ideological beliefs. The replacement of committed art and restricted art has led some towards disassociating themselves from social and political responsibility and lacking sympathy and solidarity with the “oppressed governments”, the oppressed and humiliated, and evaluating any sense of sympathy and solidarity with the masses that have emerged from art and artists as “political” and “restrictive” for art.

The writer intends to make references to the critical debate and dialogue that took place years ago between two prominent Iranian filmmakers, Mr. Abbas Kiarostami and Bahman Ghobadi, in order to provide an analytical explanation for this discussion. This debate itself reflects two different perspectives on the responsibility and social-political direction of art and artists.

Behman Ghobadi wrote in his open letters addressed to Abbas Kiarostami that:

“In these critical and fateful days, whether you want it or not, whether it is right or wrong, the only measure of honor, dignity, and pride is to stand with the people and join them in their struggles. With your words, you have prevented us from protesting at festivals and joining the people in filmmaking about social and political issues. The people will not forget the silence of artists. The people are the best judges in history.”

And Mr. Kiarostami had written in response:

Political films have a clear history of consumption. In my opinion, art should keep a certain distance from the realm of politics. Do you remember the experiences of films like “Gavras” and “The Rule of the Colonels”? Films that lost their credibility as soon as the political system in Greece changed?

Mr. Kiarostami’s empty response – who, of course, was a prominent artist in the field of filmmaking – shows his confusion, irresponsibility, and fear of being an artist who supports and joins the people in their protests. The argument hidden in his response is actually devoid of scientific, historical, and even artistic value; because if art is a reflection and reconstruction of social realities in the form of film and literature, then what path should be taken in the face of people’s uprising, deprivation, and oppression? Many great, prominent, and enduring literary and artistic works have been created and endured in conjunction with mass protest movements. To say that the consumption of political literary and artistic works is clear is to state a fact that has no roots in their historical reality. Although protesting and committed art can have an impact in conjunction with historical movements, they always have the possibility of returning in similar historical stages and it is not the case that their consumption history is completely over; moreover,

As mentioned, the subject of the article is not the debate between two filmmakers. This debate served as a background and introduction to the question of what role an artist is expected to play in special and exceptional historical circumstances.

Art – in all fields – in the opinion of the writer, has a role beyond documenting what happens in society. All literary, artistic, scientific works, etc. are reflections of the state, needs, and progress of society; even fictional and fantasy stories are reflections of human needs and achievements in science and imagination. Essentially, if we evaluate these concepts with a philosophical perspective, we will come to the conclusion that the center and beginning of all these works is a being called human; the human of today – in every era – and this means that “human”, their imaginations, needs, sufferings, and philosophical, scientific, and religious contemplations are the foundation of all these works. And if the duty and work of an artist is not to record and capture the ups and downs, pains and sufferings, joys and sorrows of the people, then what is it? Should the artist turn their back and take pictures of trees, mountains, flowers, plants, bread, and water in

And of course, if political films “have a specific history”, can it be said that non-political films do not have a specific history? Many historical films also have a clear political aspect. Many of these works are a “artistic reconstruction” of what happened in history. With this perspective, if the film “Spartacus” had been created at the same time, would it have been considered worthless and a temporary product because it reflects historical reality and the political-class struggle of slaves? Many political films have made a great impact on a specific historical period. In fact, the works of Gavras or the musical works of Mikis Theodorakis or the written works of Nikos Kazantzakis are not only considered as their own time, but are also among the best classics in the world.

“An image of a person standing on a mountain, looking out at the beautiful landscape.”
“Performance of Visual Arts Protest by Students of the Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science at Kharazmi University in Karaj”

Recording moments, being present in their context, and documenting events are among the responsibilities of a realistic artist. Essentially, an artist, whether they want to or not, when placed in the context of a social-political movement, has no choice but to choose between two paths: either align with the ruling power and promote its values, or stand with the people and represent their desires and demands. In such circumstances, every individual rushes to the aid of the people and the movement, relying on their expertise and abilities. A poet with their poetry, a singer with their music and voice, a filmmaker with their film, a photographer with their photos, and a painter with their artwork. A journalist informs the public by reflecting real events. An athlete also expresses their connection with the people in sports fields.

And truly, if it is expected that art and artists do not take steps with the people, do not accompany and sympathize with them, what are they doing? Many artists, singers, and storytellers have sacrificed themselves and become immortal by accompanying and sympathizing with the people in various periods of history. Who can condemn Victor Jara today for singing for the people of Chile and against dictatorship and coup? The song “Venceremos” is revived and reproduced in every social-political movement. The song “The Internationale” also echoes in every land and time of mass uprisings. Revolutionary songs that play an agitating role in social-political movements, leave their mark on the pages of nations’ history. Palestinian revolutionary songs and the role they played in the struggles of the Palestinian people, even in the 1957 revolution, and the musical works of active political organizations at that time, such as the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization and the Fedayeen Khalq Organization,

An artist who understands and strives to reflect their awareness, understanding, and solidarity with oppressed people in their art becomes a conscious and awake member of society, and in doing so, transforms themselves into pieces of the puzzle of social movement. A poet who, instead of describing the beauty of their beloved’s hair and eyebrows, gives value to the hungry bread and reflects social, class, and political injustices, becomes the most truthful image-maker of social issues and abnormalities in their society. This is the true committed art that creates awareness for many. This is the opposite of constrained art, which is mistakenly referred to as committed art – committed to ideologies and governments. Committed art means art in service of humanity, responsible art, and art that is in sync with and alongside the people. It is the art that embodies the idea of “if one part suffers, every part suffers with it.” This is different from the art that totalitarian governments and ideologies recommend, which dictates how to think, write, create,

Films by Gavras and other artists who have made political films, such as “The Battle of Algiers” and “Missing”, have at least one value: recording historical events, struggles, and contemporary human problems – even if they are related to current political issues, they are temporary and transient – like a literary-historical work for future generations to recognize history. They are not forgotten and their artistic-historical value distinguishes them from many mediocre cinematic works. Today, works such as those by Tahmineh Salehi or Shervin Hajipour, who have been involved and in sync with the current political and protest movement, have been met with astonishing reception from the people.

Note:

1- Letter from Bahman Ghobadi – Response from Abbas Kiarostami.

Radio Tomorrow.

“1 Azar 1388”