The articles by Houn and Sze reveal clearly the disparate
views of artistic responsibility held by the authors. Houn argues
that artists must act as a part of the revolution, that they must act,
in a sense, as the Socratic gadflies of society. He is strongly critical
of those artists whose goals he does not share. Sze, on the other
hand, states that an artist's true responsibility is to him/herself.
Both present their positions with some eloquence, but Sze's sense of artistic
compassion is perhaps more striking than Houn's revolutionary fervor.
Houn's article focuses mainly on revolutionary art,
which appears to be his artistic ideal. He states that Asian-American
art should be rooted in folk traditions. He sees art as a revolutionary
tool, a way to express viewpoints that have long been ignored by mainstream
American culture. Houn cites "imaginitive critical realism" as a
goal for the artist, though, as he does not define this term clearly, the
interpretation is left up to the reader. This stated preference for
realism would seem to tie in with his expressed cynicism towards "socialist
romanticism." It would seem that in this, he is not criticizing socialist
ideals (indeed, he reveals socialist leanings in the article), but romanticism
in general.
Sze places no such limits on the artist. One
of his most striking, and perhaps controversial statements is that "[i]t
is arrogant to assume that a writer can be a spokespersom for a community."
This is in opposition to Houn's views on Asian-American art. Sze,
while criticizing the arrogance of such a viewpoint, also relieves the
writer of a burden, the burden of representing his/her community with his/her
work. He cites artistic integrity as the most important thing for
a writer or artist. The artist is not responsible to society, or
critics, or anyone but him/herself. Sze liberates the artist from
the burdens of pleasing others or fulfilling societal needs.
Houn criticizes socialist romanticism, and art which,
in his views, panders to the bourgeoisie. Sze, however, points out
that "there is no inherently favorable content for literature." Houn's
expressed views give rise to a few questions. If imaginitive critical
realism is the goal, what should the artist be criticizing? If the
artist criticizes something held sacred by others, should society be able
to condemn them? Sze's liberating views on artistic content are much
more in sync with commonly held views of artistic freedom and freedom of
speech.
Theodore Roosevelt once said, "Speak softly and
carry a big stick." On reading Sze's article, one is impressed by
his non-judgmental tone, and senses that his artistic skill and integrity
give him the big stick which commands attention for his gentle rhetoric.
Sze places himself squarely on the side of artistic freedom, while Houn
seems to see art as a tool of the revolution, though this may be over-simplifying
the matter. Houn's insistence on content and tradition over form
and style call to mind the techniques of propaganda used by many oppressive
regimes, including that of Nazi Germany. Houn's just indignation
leads him to impose excessive conditions on art, while Sze upholds artistic
freedom and integrity as the chief virtues.
So far, I still know precious little about APA art and culture. I have a stronger background now in APA history, which naturally influences culture, but there is much that I don't understand. I also can't really say what I hope to learn. Certainly, a stronger understanding of other cultures is always beneficial, and I am always open to learning about new artists. I can not state concrete goals, because I don't think I've learned enough yet. I'd like to understand the dragon lady/lotus blossom dichotomy better, because it seems to so strongly parallel the madonna/whore ideas in mainstream American culture. I'd like to understand the challenges that Asian and Pacific Americans face, so that I can be more knowledgable about the challenges facing our nation. I really strongly believe in the unity of this country. I have delved into works by African-American authors like Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes, Latina authors like Sandra Cisneros in search of seeing more clearly the diverse parts of American culture. I welcome the chance to clarify the Asian and Pacific American portions of the tapestry, because I believe that knowledge and understanding are what keep our country strong. This all sounds like I'm talking absolute pants when I reread it, but it is all true.