I think most of the art now is involved with a denial of any kind of absolute morality, or general morality.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The true artist doesn't substitute immorality for morality. On the contrary, he always substitutes a finer morality for a grosser one.
To speak of morals in art is to speak of legislature in sex. Art is the sex of the imagination.
Good art however 'immoral' is wholly a thing of virtue. Good art can NOT be immoral. By good art I mean art that bears true witness, I mean the art that is most precise.
Morality will perform all this; and Morality is the fruit of Illumination.
I think art is inherently nonviolent and it actually occupies your mind with creation rather than destruction.
The essential function of art is moral. But a passionate, implicit morality, not didactic. A morality which changes the blood, rather than the mind.
Fundamentally, all art is about human beings. You're always showing larger moral questions through the smaller moral, philosophical, or political choices through one character in the book.
It is now life and not art that requires the willing suspension of disbelief.
I believe that my art gets across the point that I'm in this morality theater trying to help the underdog, and I'm speaking socially here, showing concern and making psychological and philosophical statements for the underdog.
Art, like morality, consists in drawing the line somewhere.