One of the defining pieces of art of the 20th century is literally a toilet. Marcel Duchamp’s piece of “fountain” was simply a functioning toilet that he had bought from a store. The piece was displayed for just a day, before a cleaner threw it out, thinking it was trash. However, in it one day of existence, “fountain” managed to completely obliterate every single boundary governing the nature of art, instantaneously ignite a firestorm of controversy, and essentially spawn the entirety of the modern art movement, breathing new life into an art form many considered dead. Art is something that needs to evolve or die, and for art to evolve, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as they want.
Some, however, would argue that artists should not be allowed to push boundaries too far, as they will inevitably push it into the realm of bad taste. These people argue that boundaries in art serve a clear purpose: to delineate acceptable moralities. To these people, for artists to push boundaries too far would constitute an act of moral deviancy and public indecency, and thus denigrate the very nature of art, which they believe to inspire and reflect good values. These are the people who will protest against films such as “Hostel” for its perceived excessive violence, artists such as H.R Giger for his hyper sexually art pieces, or bands like Iron Maiden for their “Satanic Imagery”. To these people, art, above all else, needs to be moral. Without proper morality, the entire piece of art is invalidated to them.
While it might be true that some artists do not reflect very good morals, I also believe that that is entirely irrelevant. Art, above all else, must seek to reflect life honestly. To inaccurately represent life due to boundaries concerning morals and taste is, I believe, a far more grievous sin then not reflecting appropriate morality. Life is hard and scary, and people sometimes are filled with violence and cruelty. These are not things we like to think about, and yet it is precisely why artists need to incorporate them into their work. To forget about the harsher facts of life is not just a failure on the part of the artist, it also does a disservice to the consumer who is no longer challenged and brought out of their comfort zones. This is precisely why we require filmmakers such as Harmony Korrine and Nicholas winding Refn, whose films push various boundaries and are eminently controversial. Without the ability to push boundaries as far as possible, art loses a great portion of its verisimilitude, and hence also its power to engage us. Thus, for art to reflect life honestly, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as they want.
There is also another group that believes art should not push against political and religious boundaries. These people believe that political and religious beliefs are a private and personal thing, and thus art has no business attempting to influence the use and change our opinions. Art, while entertaining, should, in their eyes, remain apolitical as politics and religion are too controversial and messy to be discussed in such a manner. These are the people who decry filmmakers such as Oliver Stone, or Michael Moore, for making what they consider to be fundamentally biased and untruthful political films. To these people, politics is simply too dangerous a topic for art to tread upon, and thus they believe that artists should not push boundaries, but rather seek to entertain.
While it is true that politics and religion are deeply personal, I believe it is extremely important for art to discuss it, so as to start conversations about it. For us all to be better, more enlightened human beings, we need to be able to confront our biases and prejudices and learn to fully argue for our own personal beliefs. Art, in presenting its own views on politics and religion, creates conversation and forces us to examine our own ideas. This is present in films such as “Four Lions” which presents a harrowingly realistic depiction of how ordinary youths can be radicalized into terrorists, thus refuting the simple caricature many have of terrorists as evil religious fundamentalists. In this way, as we confront our own opinions, we can refine them and thus emerge as fuller people with more informed and cohesive thoughts. This visceral confrontation occurs also in games such as “This war of mine” which through placing the player in the role of a civilian in a warzone, invites one to think about the true cost of war. Art, by pushing boundaries, also causes people to start conversations about issues and thus move to fix them. This can be seen in how Kendrick Lamar’s 2015 album “To pimp a butterfly” intensified discussion of racism in America, and brought awareness to the issue. Thus, for art to challenge, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible.
Fundamentally, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible in order to evolve. What boundaries represent is a hard limit on what artists can think? To be able to consistently create new material and evolve, artists should and must push the boundaries and evolve their thinking. This has always been how art evolves, from the ’60s when the Beatles released their album Sergeant peppers and ushered in psychedelic rock, to James Joyce’s Ulysses which broke many taboos and define the modernist novel, to 1968’s Bonnie and Clyde, Which completely disregarded Hollywood’s codes of morality, and ushered in the modern filmmaking system. Art always requires pioneers to break the mould and push the boundaries. Only then will the rest follow and new things can be made. Artists thus should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible or art will simply stagnate and die.
The art throughout history has always held a unique ability to challenge, excite, and entertain us. It has always been changing, yet the only constant is the ability of artists to push the boundaries. As Frank Zappa once said: Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. Thus artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible, as that is how art stays relevant.