Politically art that drives me

Song & video by Will.i.am of The Black Eyed Peas.
Inspired by Barack Obama’s ‘Yes We Can’ speech.

This inspires. I don’t mean to bring politics into my blog, well no, I do, but I bring this also as a work of art. Yes, you can call it propaganda and to many it probably is. But I believe it, I remember the speech, I’ll remember where I was when it was given (New York City) and I will look to it and this video when needing courage and hope in that better tomorrow for this country. I support Barack Obama!

Thank you Dipdive for giving this to the people.


(I had to find it on youtube to be able to host it here. Does anyone know how to embed on wordpress from the original site, dipdive.com, so I don’t have to find it on youtube?)

Ps. what is of relative value to this blog is the artistic merit of such a video. Is this art? Is this just propaganda? Or better yet is it just an advertisement, and therefore should not even qualify to be art as its “purpose” is not artistic. But is that so true and furthermore who defines an “artistic” purpose. In looking at this (and I know it is very hard for me to separate my own political bias from it, so I do understand that that is in this next statement) I believe it is art. It is raw emotion, harnessed by the creators and yes it does support a politician but it also supports so much more. I see real heart in this and would argue that the emotional energy used to create and give this project to the world places it squarely in the realm of art, perhaps a subgenre of political art, but art none the less.

Happy Super Tuesday everyone!



5 Responses to Politically art that drives me

  1. izzy says:

    Wow. I mean, I’m not surprised at the existance of this video, especially from Will.i.am and the black eyed peas, since this isn’t the first political song i’ve heard from them (the first that comes to mind is the black eyed peas “Where is the love” that seemed inspired by 9/11). But still, this is quite the video and statement. I feel that as much as this is supporting a candidate, it’s also supporting a feeling. That feeling is hope. Yes, at the core of this maybe the artists are trying to get people to vote for obama, and sure, i of course have my own political views, but still this video is abouut hope. The speech could easily be lyrics writen by a songwriter in hopes of giving people something to believe in.
    Thank you for pointing this video out. it is truly inspirational. i hope i’m not alone in being affected by this video and message. Needless to say, I find his speech refreshing, but i suppose that might just be my own bias, and might have no place on this blog. Such a good video though. I need to watch it a couple more times before i can speak on it fully.

  2. Copper says:


    politics, politicians, policies come and go. the day after we elect a new president, we know that we will still be able to go about our daily lives just as we had the day before. nothing much changes. the political world doesn’t affect very much. but it tries. it just can’t do much without individuals. individuals learning their rights, learning their process, learning their world. when individuals learn that they can talk about hope; when individuals learn that they can have influence; when individuals learn that they can believe in change; when individuals learn that they can affect the process; that’s when we will have new politics, new politicians, and new policies. not necessarily because of who we elect, but who we believe in.

    “I’m asking you to believe — not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington…I’m asking you to believe in yours.”

  3. JD says:

    Do propaganda and advertisement not run along the same lines?

  4. huysmans says:

    They do from certain angles. That’s a weak answer so let me elaborate on it. I would be one to argue that both propaganda and advertisements in general have a measure of artistic credibility, after all a great deal of aesthetic theory is applied to their creation. But for many and unfortunately the “canon” of artistic history there is a division between that which is propaganda and that which is political art. The difference lies in the motive, in the creator of the piece. Propaganda has a primary function of delivering a political message, if you strip it of its politics then you would be forced to call it something else. Second to that function is its ability to exist as a work of art. The Dadas in particular danced along the line that separates the former from the latter. When the latter exists on its own, and by that I mean it was created first as a work of art and second to that level of existence its content is political, it is called political art and can therefore be critiqued in the academic sense.

    Personally I hate such distinctions and find that what we are dealing with are different audiences but pretty much the same objects. The artist who uses politics in his art attracts the audience that is seeking out art, propaganda on the other hand attracts the audience that is seeking out politics, or rather is having politics thrust upon them in the advertisement sense.

    But the short answer is that the question is still and probably always being debated. I think they do, but I can know many who don’t.


  5. The Black Eyed Peas free video

    Nice Post… do you know what is the first? i`ve the new album at my blog http://sumpit.info

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: