Art as political symbol, fetish and commodity

In this paper I look at the symbolic power of art and how different political movements and regimes use and misuse art. Many artists have created art which is critical to the political or economic power since the late eighteen hundreds, starting with Courbet, who encouraged by Baudelaire painted the heroes of everyday life. Some artists have also been affiliated with political movements, for example Courbet was engaged in the 1871 Paris Commune. Such art may become symbolic representations of ideological movements in their struggle of freedom, equal rights and end of wars. Conversely, some political movements and regimes misuse art, such as the German Nazi regime who claimed that the art of C.D. Friedrich represented the true German spirit. On other occasions artists have been affiliated with fascist regimes, for example the Italian futurists. In totalitarian regimes art and the role of artists have often been misused; dictated to create art to glorify the leaders. Today we witness a commercialization of art in the Western society. Many famous artists create art in factory like studios. Often their art become expensive commodities and fetish objects for superrich, who use art only as status symbols to demonstrate their power and wealth in a similar way as expensive cars and yachts. Although most contemporary artists do not create art for this purpose, a growing number of artists seem to be seduced by the money value of art and contribute with little hesitation to the commercialization of art. From the perspective of art, this is problematic, because in a long term it may waive the art’s autonomy. Many artists are also supported economically by corporations or private collectors who become patrons, a practice that diverge from country to country, but where the economic power, rather than artists may dictate the development of art.