I am an artist and I am an activist and each complements the other. I've been an activist longer than I've been an artist. I have been an activist in the workplace, and on the streets. I have been a social commentator longer than I have been an artist.
My art is my voice calling for social change.
Activist art is more likely than not to be upsetting. I think a conscience artist must live with that aspect, but still must set out to query, to stimulate thought, and even upset the natural order of things.
An activist artist must stimulate through his work, but also his passion to do the right thing, the sincerity of his beliefs and the will to stand for what he believes in.
As an artist of conscience, I do not have any singular cause… the overarching thought being that once there is social, economic and political inequities, once there is discrimination, oppression, injustice, exploitation… I will try to lend my voice to it.
At the same time, I am not a one-dimensional artist. I have no problems with using beauty. As much as I want my art to be soul-searching, emotional, sometimes even disturbing, I also want it to be beautiful. It is often difficult to combine beauty with death, oppression, exploitation… but I do it in a balance way wherein one does not take away from the other.
My work is either 'Image-driven', or 'objective-driven'. Most of my work starts out 'objective driven', in that I start with a specific idea/objective and develop it from there. At other times, I start with an image, a visual idea, and subconsciously it develops into a protest piece.
The goal of my art is to draw attention to the inequities of modern society, and to stimulate thinking of how to make an improved world. If I manage to get even one person to think differently about the society they live in, I consider my efforts worthwhile.