Political artists maybe? Where the politics ends and art starts? How thin is the threshold? Is this a solid line between the two or are there some gaps? Perhaps a dotty lines like this ........................... will solve all our doubts.
Seriously, art and images are really more powerful than words, especially in politics. Art is indeed powerful even in peaceful situations, and when it comes to depict the horrors of a war or a vicious political debate, it's the best way to provoke awareness. I know the feeling that takes a cartoonist or a photo journalist to a certain point where your guts have the power on you, on your capacity to express disgust of what you see, through your art. On the other hand, when it comes to make art, it's a different matter. The art's purpose should be spread beauty and provoke something in your guts that are far from awareness of corruption, poverty, warfare and so on. How artists can manage they unconscious reactions and feelings towards what happens around them, is not our business, but definitely it's something we can only see through their art. The way they face all the political issues, social disruptions and harsh realities, is something that fascinates me until the point to investigate about their socio-political background, finding out the real meaning behind those lines, colours and violent paint strokes.
A taste of what I'm talking about: I've bumped into an interesting website earlier this week called Cartoon Movement where artworks depict social and political issues without favoritisms and with a hint of sarcasms, wisely reviewed. www.cartoonmovement.com