Examining the committed art and social responsibility of the artist in conversation with Hafez Musavi, poet.

Who is a committed artist? Is art simply a result of an artist’s reaction to political and social situations? What is the state of committed and protest art in the current protests in Iran? These questions have been asked numerous times throughout different historical periods in the world, but the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran and the response and support of many artists and art students has once again brought the issue of committed art in Iran to the forefront. In this regard, we sat down with Hafez Musavi, a poet and member of the Iranian Writers Association, to discuss the matter.

What does committed art mean and who is a committed artist?

First, we must pay attention to “committed art”. The discussion of social commitment by writers and artists seems to have become an old and outdated topic; at least it was pretended to be so in certain periods, but I don’t think it is. Because four elements are involved, the subject and the tools of a true artist or writer – of course, it cannot be said that everyone is a true artist – are necessary; language, human, truth, and beauty. If we accept that these four fundamental elements are the subject and the field of work of an artist, any attack or threat against these four subjects, the artist is responsible and inevitably faces them.

Examples of this issue are as follows: When people are deceived by linguistic fabrications or fake titles such as “Inspection Tour”, how can an artist remain indifferent to this linguistic deception and violation? Similarly, when a person’s dignity is easily attacked and human dignity is not respected, how can an artist remain indifferent to this?

There is also the truth about this. Where lies are constantly told and the truth is the subject of the artist’s work, how can the artist be indifferent? The same goes for beauty; that which makes the face of humans and society ugly; it corrupts virtue, morality, and all standards of human life; the artist must stand against all of this and resist. The commitment of the artist stems from here. This is a general balance, but at an abstract level, we can say that in Western countries, perhaps the level that exists here does not have the same significance.

The viewpoint of French philosopher Paul Ricœur stands against the committed art of Jean-Paul Sartre. This philosopher believes that if an artist is focused on their work, without intending to serve society, they are actually serving society. He says not to get caught up in the idea that an artist must always be committed to social matters; in fact, if an artist simply focuses on their work in these four areas that encompass the human realm, they are helping society progress.

But in a country like ours, where the issue of creating and artistic work is faced with severe censorship, the situation is different. Creative work and art are not censored, but the political institution of art and writing is under the blade of censorship. Freedom for the artist is a professional necessity; meaning the artist must be free to present their artistic work, not censor themselves, and be able to spread their wings and pursue their dreams. From this perspective, the artist is inevitably involved with social and political issues. Additionally, a writer does not only want freedom for themselves; if a society is not free or is suppressed, they do not fundamentally need to pursue artistic work. Therefore, when these factors come together, I cannot understand how an artist can remain indifferent to their society or not be influenced by it and reflect it; of course, commitment to it does not mean becoming cliché. The artist does not create in a vacuum, and these issues are considered the subject of their work.

On the other hand, ideological institutions create a series of guidelines for the creation of works, such as the Zhdanovism system in Stalinist Russia, which is not my concern. The living and tangible relationship between the writer and artist and their society connects them, and they can no longer break free from this bond.

In light of your statements, is it inevitable that an artist’s works are created based on the political and social context of our society?

Art is essentially a collective and social work, but in our country, this issue quickly becomes entangled with political matters and power struggles. The primary need for an artist is freedom. Who threatens and suppresses this freedom? One is political power and the other is tradition, both of which act simultaneously in our country. The guardians of tradition are the same ones who hold political power, and with their own interpretations of morality, justice, and everything else, they do not allow freedom in any aspect of society. An example of this is the issue of women’s clothing, which has now become a public matter.

Therefore, there is a difference between Western societies where there is a level of democracy and here, where censorship is imposed by tradition and political power. The artist is inevitably involved in politics and must resist censorship and confront both political power and traditional defenders or enforcers of censorship; otherwise, there will be no platform for their work and they will constantly face imperfect creatures.

What historical transformation caused an artist to go from a secluded genius to a committed individual towards society? If we turn to Hannah Arendt for help in defining isolation and name two types of creative isolation and imposed political isolation, where the first leads to growth and creation and the second results in losing oneself, individuality, and becoming shapeless, how does an artist connect to society while maintaining that creative isolation?

I came across Nima Youshij’s recommendations about the discussion of solitude. Nima tied the knot of our new poetry with a social approach. Our new poetry begins with the Constitutional period and the connection between poetry and society. Nima advises to look outside! Get involved with people! But also turn back to yourself and don’t lose your solitude!

“Art is a personal endeavor; we may see collective work in a performance or in cinema, but the main creativity takes place in solitude. It is what leads to a period of isolation or distancing from the real issues of people’s lives – which we experience in our own literature – that is born out of failure. In periods where there is a kind of failure in social and ideal matters, people usually become hopeless and disappointed. If we also consider the work of the great poet Ahmad Shamlou, in a period, for example in the 1940s, Shamlou’s approach to poetry changes from being angry at people to saying, “I do not speak of your pain; I speak of a pain that is your own.” I mention this in the introduction of the book.”

Social Poetry Ontology

I mentioned that this turning away from the people is the result of defeat. In the late 1990s and early 1970s, the heavy defeat that the intellectuals of Iran and a large part of the Iranian people suffered, and as the brothers say, the high ceiling of their noble aspirations collapsed, followed by despair and hopelessness.

On the other hand, if there is a specific experience that we pass through, this period is the period of the prevalence of postmodern ideas that have no truth, literature is self-referential and has no external purpose. This is due to the same policies that coincide with the rise of neoliberal policies globally and the collapse of the left. Whenever society begins to become dynamic and alive, the branches of art take hold of it. As we mentioned about Shamloo, he becomes the spokesperson or representative of the new movement that has taken shape in Iran since the 1950s. The artist lives in this society and if their branches work properly, they will be affected by these circumstances.

How is the boundary between committed art and promoting a specific ideology determined?

The aesthetic criteria fully demonstrate this subject. Where it is said, it is not a work of art, but where it is shown, it is the work of an artist. The artist reflects the spirit of their time, because the artist is not supposed to tell people to do this or that. The artist shows the depths of society. Here, I refer to Nima, who says that knowing is not enough, showing is enough; meaning we must turn our social experience into an artistic experience, otherwise we can also excite people in a political article or give a slogan in a statement.

On the other hand, for example, when we examine the works of the Constitutional Period, such as Seyed Ashraf Gilani, we may say that it lacks artistic value in terms of aesthetics, but its social function cannot be ignored; of course, bringing the language of the people, the language of the streets and markets, into their poetry was a social matter in terms of aesthetics. The language of the Iranian people, a language that has a deep connection with the emotions of the Iranian people, enters poetry somewhere. It is not fair to say that an artist cannot deviate from the standards of first-rate aesthetics when there is an urgent social issue and the artist is influenced by it.

From Nima to the 1990s, we had poets who were passionate and idealistic, but at the same time, if there is any social and political poetry left today, it belongs to Shamlou, or to Nima and Forough Farrokhzad; this is a historical judgment. When they asked Shamlou if he was worried that his political approach and current issues would make his poetry dated, he replied: “It doesn’t matter to me; I want to speak my mind and it doesn’t matter what they say about my poetry tomorrow.” There is no doubt about the concept of artistic work and what the main purpose of art and artistic work is, but I believe that in some places, it is possible to use these discussions of aesthetics only as a tool and transfer it to society; but we don’t call it an artistic work.

Can the social and political context commit a work of art, or does a work of art also need to be committed to other things?

To commit a work of art to society is, from one perspective, to limit the scope of the work, but from another perspective, the work of art is a social matter; meaning that the work of art is the creator of the work, it is the work itself, and its third side is the audience and the person who receives the work; therefore, the work of art is a social matter and is not separate from society, but how it reacts to social issues becomes more serious here; similarly, an artist who works abstractly and abstractly is also important in his own place.

گفتار خود همیشه به هنر و آزادی اشاره می‌کند

The subject matter of the various forms of art that are available as tools is different, but true artists can find a moment in history for their art depending on their talent or previous training. A report on what is happening on a daily basis has many epic and tragic aspects that can also be addressed in a journalistic statement, but the artist is the one who finds it for their art; the language of art finds the issue. In the poetry of poets like Mohammad Mokhtari, art is committed and his art is not a slogan, but in his speech he always refers to art and freedom.

Iranian system

He tries to link Iranian history with myths, some of which are successful and some are not.

These special historical times that we are dealing with intense daily changes, may cause the artist’s mind to become automated and inevitably react to current issues; perhaps if it were in a normal situation, they would review their work and find its weaknesses, and maybe something else would come out of it; so these special moments must be taken into consideration.

For example, the famous painting by Picasso, Guernica, while it may be the most protestful expression, is also one of the masterpieces of art. There is a tendency not to taint the skirt of art with current issues, but that is not the case. Any subject, depending on the personality, education, social status, and experiences of the artist, can be the raw material of their artwork. Now this could be society, beauty, love, or morality; for example, someone like Eliot from the modernists who says, “Anything can be turned into art, even philosophy can be turned into poetry; as long as we have the tangible, that is, embodiment.” My personal experience these days is the same; I am influenced, a subject revolves in my mind until I feel it has found its form.

In other words, it can be said that our social perception and sensory relationship, or our first relationship with that external object, takes form. Because a work of art is nothing outside of its form; of course, I do not draw a conclusion in all of these cases. Circumstances, necessities, situations, and functions are all important together; the same judgment that we make today about conditional poetry; this judgment can be made about a part of the works that have practical use today, but tomorrow we must consider their aesthetic values in relation to that social context.

What quality in Shamlou’s poetry does not have an expiration date? Considering that Shamlou has many poems about the social and political context of his time, why does he still have an audience?

Shamlou’s poetry has several characteristics; one is his mastery of the Persian language. A poet who does not have a command of the language and its capabilities, their work is lacking. The second issue is the diversity in Shamlou’s work. Shamlou’s readers are diverse; for example, some of his poems that are very popular are not favored by those who have a professional and critical view of poetry. However, in Shamlou’s resume, there is so much diversity and in its own way, his poetry is enduring and of the highest quality, as Nima says: “I am a river from which anyone can draw water from any point”, has this characteristic.

On the one hand, our society is a frustrated and oppressed society. Many criticize Shamlou’s language and say that it is a language of power and oppression. Perhaps some are right, but the argument is that Shamlou has considered this language for someone who wants to raise their head; meaning the heroic aspect of Shamlou’s poetry. We have a group of poets who express these same concepts with a romantic language, but that heroic aspect has been absent in our social life, and we have always been defeated and fallen into despair, and ultimately this greatness belongs to Shamlou; a great person whose words are also great.

Can it be said that art of protest does not change artistic forms and that revolutionary art creates change in form or structure?

This issue cannot be attributed to short-term social emotions. With the changes of eras, meaning if a revolution turns one era into another, naturally it will be reflected in forms; even Nima says somewhere: “The artist is the one who changes society with new forms and in a way, it is society itself that requires new forms.” Just as the form of Nima’s poetry was necessary for us in the transition from tradition to modernity.

This transformation is evident in the events after the Bahman Revolution. If you compare the forms before the 1357 Revolution, it is clear. This is a result of new experiences, of moving from one social stage to another, leaving some things behind and bringing others; for example, in poetry of this period, we are faced with more narrative elements, in order to be able to express previous experiences.

Social and political occasions were not complicated in the past. The issue was clear; there was an oppressor and an oppressed, or a ruler and a subject. However, the experience we have gained in the past two or three decades has transformed this society in terms of social classes, moral, intellectual, and ideological layers, which in itself is a change in form. A change in form that is evident in the diversity seen in artistic forms in the past three or four decades.

In this current era, it is still too early to conclude whether this movement has had an impact or not; however, I am sure it will have an impact; even this song that Shervin has sung, although some criticize certain lines, but the fact that a series of contradictory statements have come together and turned into a whole that we love, is an issue in itself.

One of the things that exists in literary criticism is coherence; meaning that all statements must overlap with each other. I don’t want to give a manifesto for creating a song, but how is it that in the song “For”, a series of contradictory statements can create a whole for us? This is due to the multiplicity of social layers and floating desires; desires that may seem very basic, but are very important; it seems to belong to a specific group, but belongs to everyone. On one hand, the issue of gender is raised, but on the other hand, it becomes very common. All of these are seeds that exist in this movement and will also affect literature; of course, we must wait because predicting and forecasting is the work of fortune tellers.

Thank you for the opportunity you have provided us with to reach a peace agreement.