History is a blueprint for the future. Art is merely the ink. With this in mind, this argumentative essay shall discuss this statement in relation to monumental political artworks; Goya's 3rd of May 1808 and Picasso's Guernica. As well as discussing the development of political art - in relation to graffiti art and computer generated art - to justify art as a powerful political tool used throughout history and today's modern world. As our era is the "modern" era and differs from the past as a result of several fundamental revolutions that radically changed - and continue to change - the world. In hindsight of this one of the main bases of recording a proportion of the peoples views is through their art of the time, in relation to the events occurring around them and society its self.
In Francisco de Goya y Lucientes 3rd of May 1808 justifies this - political art documenting history - however it should be known that in all these cases it is the artist's interpretation of what is happening, which ultimately is politics.
The Second of May, 1808: The Charge of the Mameluk...
Josefa Bayeu (or Leocadia Weiss)
The Second of May 1808 or The Charge of the Mamelu...The piece shows a French firing squad butchering by lamplight citizens of Madrid after the fall of the city. Unlike Goya's subtle, even suave, realism of the Family of Charles IV, the method here is coarse and extreme in its departure from optical fact. The postures and gestures of the fingers are shockingly distorted to signal defiance, hatred, and terror. In keeping with the distortions of the fingers, the colour is acid and harsh, wrenched out of any normal harmony. Violent suffering and death can be rendered only in painful dissonances of shape and colour. The event depicted in this work is the violent French repression of the patriots who rose up in rebellion on 02 May 1808 against the invading...