In 2013, Disney released the animated film sensation Frozen, which went on to gross over a billion dollars in revenues. It was the story of Elsa who, after being locked away to protect others from magic powers she could not control, eventually fled the kingdom and sought the freedom of isolation where she could be herself.
The turning point for Elsa arrives as she climbs into the mountains and sings the popular song, “Let it Go.” The lyrics include the following lines:
It’s time to see what I can do,
To test the limits and break through.
No right, no wrong, no rules for me.
I’m free.
Let it go, let it go.
That perfect girl is gone.
Here I stand in the light of day.
Let the storm rage on.
Of course, in true Disney form, sister Anna journeys into the mountains to find Elsa, eventually convincing her to return to the kingdom and assume her place as queen.
Nevertheless, some critics have argued that the message contained in Elsa’s anthem, “Let it Go,” taken out of context from the movie, encourages children to reject conventional standards, rebel against social norms, and challenge parental and school authority.
A generation earlier, in 1979, the band Pink Floyd released its concept album The Wall, perhaps best known for these lyrics:
We don’t need no education.
We don’t need no thought control.
No dark sarcasm in the classroom.
Teachers—leave them kids alone.
The songwriter, Roger Waters, would later explain his composition as a critique of a system of standardized education that often allowed struggling students to fall through the cracks. But whatever his motives, reports followed the album’s release of students breaking out in unison to disrupt classes with the cynical lyrics.
In the same way, many contemporary rap songs have been criticized for seeming to promote misogyny, cultural tribalism, and violence.
All of which leads us to this question:
To what degree do artists have a moral obligation to anticipate the effect their art will have on society, particularly on young children who may lack the sophistication to recognize satire and understand it in context?
Grapple with the Gray
List two or three reasons why artists should focus solely on their art without concern for how it will be interpreted.
List two or three reasons why artists should self-censor their art by anticipating its impact.
Is there another alternative?
Having weighed the options, what would you do as an artist?
Gray Matters
In 1729, Jonathan Swift published a short pamphlet titled, A Modest Proposal: For preventing the children of poor people in Ireland from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick.
After briefly identifying the problem of unwanted, indigent children in Ireland, the author then outlines in dispassionate, clinical detail a solution whereby these children might be slaughtered and cooked to feed the remainder of the population. By advancing such a reasonable-sounding argument for such a shocking policy, the author effectively skewered the ruling classes who showed little inclination to address the plight of the poor.
Of course, the power of Swift’s satire was that (almost) everyone knew it was satire. But imagine if some had interpreted his plan as a serious proposal and proposed its implementation.
Over time, shock value has become an end in itself for many artists. Despite—or perhaps, because of—their talent and creativity, many artists leave too much room for audiences of any age to misinterpret their meaning, even if we assume that their intentions were as noble and purely artistic as they might later claim.
Art is a form of communication and, as such, should communicate values that will elevate society, not accelerate its descent into chaos. As dark as George Orwell’s dystopian classic 1984 may have been, it was clearly intended as a warning against the natural outcome of totalitarian government. Similarly, such modern classics as The Matrix, The Giver, and Blade Runner leave little room to misinterpret their moralizing.
You don’t have to look too hard to recognize how television, cinema, and the Internet have recalibrated social norms throughout modern culture. Whether you believe those changes have been for better or for worse, the influence of art on contemporary values is undeniable.
In the words of Spiderman, with great power comes great responsibility. Artists have the same responsibility as politicians, entertainers, and anyone else who holds the spotlight to consider how their words, their actions, and their art will—or might—influence the society that consumes them.
Even for those of us who are not artists, don’t we also share the ethical obligation to resist the darkness of cynicism and contribute to the light of hope for a better future and faith in the nobility of humankind?