And David (part 2), last but certainly not least, as I said above, I do agree with your comment that making art is socially responsible but not all artists see it that way and not all art is responsible. The instruction of social responsibility is tricky because so often instruction is based in fashion, what’s current, and that dilutes the importance of taking responsibility with one’s work. But to never discuss the reasons for taking responsibility with one’s work is perhaps worse. To be allowed to make work in “unlimited and uninhibited freedom to produce and express”, as Benjamin Buchloh describes in his essay is irresponsible on the part of educational institutions. It just sends the message that “you are all that is important” which we as mature adults understand (hopefully) not to be the case.
As you say yourself, “contractually however the supplier is bound to supply what is required” which to my mind reinforces my point that if we expect society to support us and our work we owe a debt of responsibility in what we produce and present to society. Perhaps it is because I am American (remembering the “Contract with America” years of Papa Bush), but I feel we are bound to supply what is required – and I don’t mean just making work that people want like the pretty seascapes you’ve mentioned before. I mean making work that fulfills both our personal needs and that of society. That is not always easy; it requires boundaries and limitations, something a liberal society doesn’t always like.
