We agree with Daniel Buren, of course, that all artistic practice is political with a small 'p', and that there are socio-economic implications in the decision to be an artist. But how can art's political and social impact be measured? Joseph Beuys would surely claim a central importance for the creative process in the life of the culture but Duchamp, one of our heroes, would measure such an impact in the weight of a worn shirt.
Are we to be expected to contribute politically and socially to the culture that has so effectively abandoned its obligations to support our activities?
The jobs of art and politics appear oppositional: It seems to us that art creates innumerable potential answers to provocative and fundamental questions, while the politician provides only simplistic answers to stupid questions.
