Still In Bloom

There were many online discussions regarding Bad Bunny’s record breaking Super Bowl performance last week. Could his love and homage to Puerto Rico be considered an act of joy as resistance given all that is happening in America right now, particularly regarding ICE’s harassment of Black and Latinx people in the United States? Or was him performing at one of the world’s most largest stages simply a part of a larger state-sanctioned propaganda that co-opts culture and turns it into profit, stifling the anger amongst those on the verge of fighting back against the regime?

These questions circulating on social media gave me a lot to think about, and I wanted to explore if art in itself could be revolutionary.

Before I get into it, I am a firm believer that words mean things, and I try to be intentional with my language, reminding myself of definitions when necessary. What is art? What does it mean to be revolutionary? What does joy as resistance look like?

art

noun

1. the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
2. the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance.
3. subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history.
4. a skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice.

revolutionary

adjective

1. involving or causing a complete or dramatic change
2. engaged in or promoting political revolution

noun

1. a person who works for or engages in political revolution.

resistance

noun

1. the refusal to accept or comply with something; the attempt to prevent something by action or argument,
   • armed or violent opposition,
   • (also resistance movement) [in singular] a secret organization resisting authority, especially in an occupied country.

Simmering on these definitions and the ways I’ve engaged with art in my own life helped me come to the conclusion that art can be revolutionary in certain contexts, and used as a tool for revolution in others. Joy can be an act of resistance in certain contexts as well, i.e. extremely oppressive or genocidal environments. According to Queer Magic Entertainment, joy stops being in an act of resistance when it:

• replaces solidarity;
• discourages discomfort;
• shames grief or anger; and
• demands silence to keep the peace.

Source: Oxford Dictionary.

Since I was young, I’ve always known that media was the most powerful medium known to man. As is quoted by Jim Morrison, “whoever controls the media, controls the mind.” This is especially true in the modern politics of the United States, and has been true for decades.

Media plays a critical role in the construction of cultural narratives. From traditional broadcast television to digital media platforms, the media acts as a gatekeeper that determines which stories are told and how they are framed.

– Ahmed, Mohammed & Miracle, Agboola & Mark, Mabere. (2020). The impact of media on shaping global cultural narratives in the digital age.

Therefore, when art pushes against state-sanctioned propaganda or oppressive systems, I do believe it can be revolutionary. Specifically, I believe art can be revolutionary when there is risk involved in creating or sharing the art.

For example, if an artist’s work gets them arrested for criticizing the government (such as Iranian filmmaker Jafar Panahi or M.F. Husain, aka the ‘Picasso Of India’).

There are nuances in whether or not the creators even meant for their art to have the impact they had. For example, though Jafar Panahi was arrested for making an “anti-state film”, he didn’t consider his films to be political, but an observation:

One of the charges against me is attempting to encourage demonstrations and incite protests with this film. All through my career I have emphasized that I am a socially committed filmmaker not a political one. My main concerns are social issues; therefore my films are social dramas not political statements. I never wanted to act as a judge or a prosecutor. I am not a filmmaker who judges but one who invites other to see. I don’t get to decide for others or to write any kind of manual for anybody; please allow me to repeat my [intention] to place my cinema beyond good and evil.

…

I have been accused of participating in demonstrations. No Iranian filmmaker was allowed to use his camera to capture the events but you can not forbid an artist to observe! As an artist it is my responsibility to observes in order to get inspired and create. I was an observer, and it was my right to observe.

…

History testifies that an artist’s mind is the analytical mind of his society. By learning about the culture and history of his country, by observing the events that occur in his surroundings, he sees, analyzes and presents issues of the day through his art form to the society.

– Jafar Panahi’s statement to the court while he was on trail following his arrest.

Some art is revolutionary in the fact that its existence is a form of resistance or that it directly inspires or incites revolutionary acts. From enslaved Africans in South America braiding routes to freedom in their hair, to how art helped to preserve literacy during the Dark Ages, there are many instances of art being used for resistance, historical documentation and/or political dissent.

In other instances, art may not be revolutionary to such a degree, but can be used to inspire other forms of dramatic change. For example, shows like Modern Family and Glee had a huge impact on American audiences, with reports of positive sentiments for same-sex marriage increasing after watching.

Given my earlier analysis, Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance wasn’t revolutionary or an act of resistance. His safety was not at risk, and there was no dramatic or revolutionary cultural shifts following the performance. On the contrary, the capitalist machine was fed by it. Did I find it to be propaganda? No. Will it help shift attitudes toward immigration? Maybe.

Multiple things can be true at once. From an artistic and cultural standpoint, it was an indisputably incredible performance with significant symbolism, and it was political. Since I love definitions:

political 

adjective

1. relating to the government or the public affairs of a country.
2. relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics.
3. interested in or active in politics.
4. motivated or caused by a person’s beliefs or actions concerning politics.

Source: Oxford Dictionary.

Bad Bunny intentionally used the original Puerto Rican flag (which at one point was outlawed), and had Ricky Martin singing a song about Hawaii’s statehood, alluding to a preference for Puerto Rico’s independence.

As an artist, Bad Bunny has used his art and directly spoken out about social issues, including denouncing ICE the week before his halftime show at the Grammy’s.

He has even been credited to giving voice to Puerto Rico’s ‘crisis generation’, representing the youth who have known more turmoil than good times in the country.

While his Super Bowl performance wasn’t a revolutionary act, he is an important figure and has had cultural impact over the course of his career.

Aside from the Super Bowl, art is political whether the artist believes so or not, as they are affected and responding to the world around them.

All in all, whether art is created with the intent of revolution, dissent, or purely for expression, I believe it should “comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable” as was said by activist César A. Cruz, and later popularized by street artist Banksy. 

Art is essential to a functioning society, to help people process their emotions and keep an open, critical mind. Art can heal, inspire, and incite. Art can be joyful, and help people survive in the darkest of times. It is powerful, and shouldn’t be taken for granted, regardless of how deep its impact.