Art, Free Speech, and Crossing the Line

Art is beautiful. It adds to the beauty of a place. The creativity behind artworks has made me respect artists because I know what it means to be creative and to pull off something as they do. Not precisely like how they do because I'm not an artist, but in a way I can relate to creative work and thinking. But art goes beyond just painting and drawing beautiful things. It's a tool for communication and expression, and artworks more than not, carry a message.

So, what do people see and what do they feel when they come across an artwork? Particularly, say murals and paintings in public spaces. Art is expressive, so it always says something. Recently, a road construction project was completed in my place. To finish up the project and open it for use, paintings were done on the sides of the underpass. It wasn't just random stuff. It was clear the paintings were beautifully portraying and displaying the cultures of the people.

That art did its due diligence. But when do these paintings and murals cross the line? Or can we say they don't cross any line since art is protected under free speech? And besides, no one is getting hurt. So, can anyone just draw whatever they want? Should they be banned if deemed offensive and what does that say about free speech? As I like to say, the justification that some things we do hurt no one because no physical hurt is experienced isn't really true.

I think people will always be hurt by actions of others, even if they're good. But we can agree some things are just not conventional. I've watched movies where street artists get chased and arrested by authorities because they were caught making paintings in some spaces which was against the law. That's one thing to consider, if it's okay to just draw something there. Also, the message adds a layer to why it could be considered problematic and offensive.

Even with free speech in the general sense of words spoken, there are things not acceptable to say on official platforms. You can't say some words. Some of them carry connotations that are offensive to a particular people or even generally unacceptable. So also with art, it's protected under free speech but what you express matters. You can't communicate racism and expect it to be acceptable. Also, elements associated with cultism. And even explicit sexual artworks.

When paintings and murals communicate social vices, explicit content, and things destructive to the mind, especially considering that there are young ones with fragile minds who can come across them, such can be banned. I've seen artworks under bridges that are just beautiful to ignore. They didn't need to go overboard to display some problematic and offensive things. Art should be a voice for good, a tool that casts something beautiful on our minds.

As free speech has repercussions; you can't go and insult someone and expect no repercussions, art, protected under free speech also has repercussions. Without repercussions, it means people can paint and design wherever they want and whatever they want to project even if it's insulting, disgusting and offensive. I think it's important that artworks don't cross unnecessary lines, but should seek to inspire and beautify.

Image is AI generated.

Thank you for reading!