When people talk of contributing to society, it usually implies getting a practical job that can directly provide a service for someone. Yet I can’t say that I’ve heard people talk in a similar fashion when it comes to artists. There is no denying that creating art is a job, but most people don’t associate art with practicality. Does this mean that art is useless?
Spoiler alert: It doesn't.
It may be easy for people to ignore artists in a way they couldn’t with other professions, say lawyers or doctors, but that doesn’t mean art can’t be just as helpful as legal help or medical aid. In fact, it is my belief that art not only improves society, but does so by enlightening the atom of any society: the individual.
I know this seems rather abstract, so let me try to explain. Most professions help people with a service that no other profession can do; for example, you have a toothache so you call a dentist because dentists are expected to help people in such situations. If they fix your toothache they have succeeded and nothing else could be asked of them. But if they fail, and continue to fail with other patients, they will eventually be fired.
What I’m trying to show is that everyone in a given society expects, more or less, the same thing out of most professions. Their contribution to society is agreed upon by the people in that society, e.g. mechanics fix cars, teachers teach, construction workers build infrastructure, etc. If they fail to do their designated job, they are no longer contributing to society.
However, amongst the masses, there are widely different opinions on what art does for us as a community. Some think it can serve as educative material, others believe it creates empathy by giving us a new perspective, or that it serves as a means of an escape from our lackluster lives, and of course there are those who see it as pointless. Therefore, the success of art will always depend on the individual at hand, for no large group of people can agree upon something as subjective as art.
And this is what I mean when I say art is about the individual, for the individual has to give it meaning, not the artist or society. Two or more individuals may agree what a piece of art signifies or does, but that's not the same as say the dentist, who no matter what offers the same service to everyone because society has deemed it that way.
Now you’re probably think “Great, who cares?” or “Doesn’t that make art not helpful if it’s purpose can’t be agreed upon?” But to me, this is precisely why art has an important role in our world -- it shows that two or more people can and will have completely different opinions on pretty much anything and that doesn't make either of them wrong. Thus, art can produce serious discussion where everyone is allowed to be an individual and express an opinion without fear of being judged.
If we applied this same mentality, that everyone has a different perspective, to say politics, wouldn’t this be for the better? If we talked about political opinions the way we talked about abstract pieces of art, wouldn’t we be forced to admit that our perspective is just as valid as the next? Or even if you believe someone’s opinion isn’t valid, you would have to hear them out before coming to that conclusion.
Because let’s face it, most people, myself included, are closed minded and have preconceived notions of how the world or society should be. It’s easy to hear someone else’s opinion but difficult to actually listen because we go into the conversation assuming our opinion is right.
I don’t want to imply that being an artist is better than any other job, in fact, no profession or job is better than the next. But I do think people seriously discussing their views on art can help people feel more comfortable expressing their emotions and create empathy amongst everyone. Sure, expressing how you feel doesn’t help the economy or provide a service, but if it helps others understand who you are and you understand others, I can’t help but think that art is an important part of society.
So, to go back to my idea that we should approach politics the way we would an abstract piece of art, I think this is how we should discuss most things in life. No one knows the purpose of an abstract piece of art, just as no one knows the purpose of life; there were things that we thought we knew in the past that turned out not to be true, and the same will happen to future generations looking back on us. If we allow ourselves to admit we don’t know what’s right or wrong we may sacrifice knowledge, but with this lack of knowledge comes emotions, empathy, and understanding.