By Mursi Saad El-Din An interesting debate is going on at the moment in England and America. It concerns the issue of politics in art or art in politics. The debate started after the release of Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11. The bone of contention is should art be political, whether covert or overt. In other woods should artists take a loud political stand or should they cloak their views in a metaphorical attire. Exponents of the covert position recall that Sophocles and Europides managed to comment on the political lives of Athenians without sacrificing "their universal relevance to mere topicality" in the words of John Rockwell in the International Herald Tribune. Rockwell believes that art exists in a context inevitably conditioned by politics, and that the values behind art express themselves artistically. Even supposedly pure abstract art, he goes on to say, "emerges from a sociopolitical context and is appreciated for political reasons." There seems to be three ways for artists to express themselves politically. One is to give a political speech at an art event, like what Moore did at the Oscar Award ceremony. The second is to be invited to give a speech in a political meeting. This is why celebrities are often invited to such events. No wonder the UN. and its many organisations have appointed stars as their ambassadors. Third there is the kind of art that is by its very nature political as it is produced by committed artists, be they writers, painters or musicians. Pablo Neruda is an example of such a committed writer. Nadine Gordimer, the 1991 literature Nobel laureate is another example. I had the pleasure of meeting her quiet a few times in P.E.N. Congresses and had the opportunity of discussing with her the concept of commitment. She is now a good-will ambassador for the UN Development Programme (UNDP) since 1998. Recently she has been involved in the battle against AIDS. About 18 months ago she came up with the idea of publishing a collection of short stories by famous world writers and donating the money raised from the sale of the book (published in 12 languages) to AIDS victims. It was amazing how writers quickly reacted to her appeal. The list of writers included such distinguished names as Arthur Miller, Margaret Atwood, Gunter Grass, Susan Sontag, Salman Rushdie and Gabriel Garcia Marquez. The twenty withers have agreed to contribute without a fee or any royalty. The collection of the short stories was published in Britain by Bloomsbury and in America by Picador. It was launched on 30 November in New York by the UN Secretary General Kofi Anan. Readings were given by Arthur Miller, Salman Rushdie and Nadine Gordimer herself. The book is published only as a paperback to make it more affordable. In an interview in the Independent Gordemer said "There were various musicians doing performances to help fight AIDS and I asked what were writers doing. We have been giving money individually but we had done nothing as a group. We are not performers. If you give a reading a few people will come along but it will not make any money. But a published book -- that's a different thing." This may not be political commitment in the strict sense of the term, but it certainly reflects the engagement of writers in the problems of the world. With all the arguments about art and politics there seems to be one important principle: to make profound political art, it's best to avoid sloganeering.
