When I create or produce art, those who know me expect something a little dark. During acting studio and monologue performances I'm always the one with a serious piece to perform. I'm told that's what I'm good at. It makes sense, because that's my favorite type of art. Comedy presents its own set of challenges, but I prefer the challenges of drama. The challenge of facing something horrible and painful and making yourself live in that moment. That sounds a little masochistic, but I believe it is very cathartic. Because of my taste in art, what I create or perform isn't always received well -- comedy sells better than drama, it's just a fact. However, I refuse to change what I'm producing. I refuse to take the heart out of my art to make it sell better. Here's why I refuse to make concessions.
First of all, the popular vote isn't going to last. Sure, I could write a feel-good piece filled with Barnum statements that everyone could relate to. People would love it... And then they'd forget it by next week. While my goal isn't necessarily to be remembered, I aim for my art to be a little more resonant than something created to produce a quick, cheap laugh. Without a distinct, meaningful purpose, creating art feels like a waste of time, and to me, it stops feeling like art.
So, what is art? I believe that art is the reflection of the human experience, which is not always pretty and fun. My personal preference is towards art that is truthful and honest, which can mean painful. I'm not claiming that feel-good pieces can't be considered art, but I believe the most powerful forms of art are painfully truthful. By refusing to write about, read about, and perform about terrible tragedies, we are denying that they exist in the world. I refuse to do that. I should note that I'm not a pessimist; I consider myself a realist (that's what all pessimists say though, isn't it?). I don't believe the world is a horrible place, but I don't want to pretend to be ignorant about the bad things that happen. You can't fix a problem if you pretend it doesn't exist. If we refuse to talk about rape, racism, murder, pedophilia, sexism, incest, torture, and more, we are refusing to fix those problems. In a sense, we are refusing those victims a voice and a chance for a better life. I guess through my art I feel like a crusader for the victimized.
But do artists have a responsibility to their audience/consumers? Especially in theatre, don't we feel that artists should aim to please and entertain their audience members? If I create and perform to make my audience members uncomfortable, is that the same as having contempt for my audience? I use art as an opportunity to shed light on situations that we try to forget in attempts to protect ourselves. I don't do it out of contempt or to harm anyone; I do it to educate and to remind ourselves of what we have the capacity to feel. Limiting our art to fluff pieces for entertainment do nothing for our society. I don't hold contempt for my audience, but I do, perhaps, exhibit a bit of tough love.
I won't make concessions and take the easy way out. If I create art that is truthful enough, it won't matter what the specific through-line is, because the universal aspects of humanity will ring through it. We all feel. We all cry. We all know pain. Sometimes it's nice to be reminded of that. Censored art won't do that for you. Artists that make concessions won't do that for you. I'll make mistakes. I'll write things that people won't like and will get hurt by. Hopefully these mistakes will lead to debates and growth, because that's what I believe art should do. Art can change the world if you're brave enough to create and consume it.
