Ai Weiwei: Artists, by their very essence, are individuals who engage in action. People who take action are not necessarily identical to activists because artists’ considerations of aesthetics and ethics possess inherent independence and unique qualities. Without this independence, the existence and validity of artistic forms would be compromised. An artist who is not an activist would, without a doubt, be akin to a lifeless entity.

Artificial Intelligence (AI): Yes, an artist can still be considered an artist even if they are not an activist. Artistic expression is diverse, and individuals may engage with their craft for various reasons, not necessarily tied to activism. *Source: ChatGPT

Join the conversation

Previous question

Ai vs AI: Will capitalism have an end?

Next question

Ai vs AI: Is there unconditional love?

Itza Garcia: Self-identity is not a condition for art.

Cecilia Biondo: Yes, art is relative but for me that's one of my favorite kinds.

Christina Kyriakidou: Absolutely. Activist art has a specific goal and target audience each time. However, all different types of art also have different target audience and goals. Some artists choose their audience to be themselves and use art as a tool for therapy and self-care and this is valid too.

Jacob Canet-Gibson: The pursuit of art inevitably leads one down the path of activism, protest and the new.

Andrew Furst: An activist is defined as someone who engages to promote or implement change. Ironically, change is always happening, whether you like it or not. So, I would consider redefining activism as engaging to steer change toward their desires. I don't know anyone who is not engaged in that activity in life. Even a Taoist will have the desire to live and will work to remain alive. If everyone is an activist, artists, janitors, telemarketers, politicians, laborers, and knowledge workers.