paintedpolitics

[paintedpolitics]

trump & the changing role of political art

recently, i was discussing differing images of marat with prospective history students. the martrydom of marat in david’s 1793 painting was conveyed through his dedication to the pen even in death, and the almost halo-like lighting in the portrait. 

a week later, images emerged of a bloodied trump defiantly holding up his fist in the aftermath of a shooting at his rally. immediately, the american right responded with commendations of martyrdom. simultaneously, ‘how did he miss’ trended on twitter. the image held incredibly different implications depending on one’s view of trump. i knew i ought to see it as the picture of irony, vindicating the stance of campaigners for gun control: an advocate of gun rights shot down. 

despite this, the image first struck me as rousing. i felt myself viewing it from the perspective that this man was for the people, would lay down his life for the american people. in this regard it reminded me of those portraits of marat. i felt that the caption accompanying the images could shape the interpretation of it in the same way that artists upheld their political opinions in portraiture. 

i made the decision to draw trump in only red, white, blue and varying shades of grey. however, i felt the political implications of creating this image every time i touched (digital) pen to paper. not only would people judge my terrible rendition of a fist, but perhaps my political views too. 

this dilemma, i concluded, revealed little about the politics of this event. what feels interesting to me in political art is not criticism or praise, but what they can reveal about the nature of power in the moment being recorded. david’s portrait of marat revealed his power as a figurehead of the revolution, and the power of l’ami du peuple in catalysing change. the red white and blue in my drawing implies the populist power that trump holds, presenting himself as a representative of the common american. highlighting the blood allowed the event to revealed his power to divide america to the point of violence, regardless of my opinion on him.

in the current media landscape, political artwork has a highly limited role in influencing opinion. i didn’t feel like any image of trump i created could dissuade someone voting for him. perhaps, a more valuable role for political art today is to objectively examine power and political relationships. as polarisation increases globally, allowing political events to be viewed through a different lens may lead to the reevaluation of ideas and more critical thought. i think iconic opinion based pieces of art - like warhol’s portrait of nixon - has immortalised popular opinion of political figures. however, as scared and angry as trump makes me, i feel like i can impact through a more objective artistic approach.