Patriotism or Hedonism?

July 16, 1945… an explosion of immense power shook the desert of Alamogordo, New Mexico. The first atomic bomb lit the morning darkness. One month later, August 6, 1945 Hiroshima was laid waste, when “Little Boy” an atomic bomb was dropped. On impact an estimated 80,000 people were incinerated. Reverend Tanimoto a survivor of the blast explained in an interview, “The intensity of the light was such that the shadows which people cast on walls were etched there permanently.” The atomic bomb brought an end to WWII.

 WWII was brought to an end, however, an ongoing debate on the validity of the bomb’s use will continue into the future. Einstein in his later years expressed regret for his part in the development of the bomb, "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them."

When a person supports the use of a bomb should they be held responsible for the repercussions? Einstein’s regret implies that he wishes the bomb had not been used. He feels regret that his actions resulted in such devastation.   

When an artist draws a picture with political implications should they be held accountable for how people react? When propaganda leads to death and destruction should the artist be held responsible or be written off as simply “artists.” Should artists use their talents to spread feelings of patriotism or to support less grandiose ideas? Artists have also drawn pictures that support bourgeois decadence. Are either of these two subjects the domain of artists?

In Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel, An Artist of the Floating World, this question is broached. The main character, Ono, is an artist who struggles with his past involvement in the creation of art depicting pleasure, “I have learnt much in contemplating the world of pleasure, and recognizing its fragile beauty. But I now feel it is time for me to progress to other things.”(180) Ono talks with his teacher, Mori-san, about how he wants to stop painting hedonistic subjects. He shares with his teacher that he wants to paint about more meaningful things, “Sensei, it is my belief that in such troubled times as these, artists must learn to value something more tangible than those pleasurable things that disappear with the morning light.”(180)  Mori-san disagrees and believes that the “floating world” is the domain artists should present through their art. Ono stops being Mori-sans pupil.

Ono moves on from his Sensei’s complex with a new objective; he wants to help the poor. However, another character, Matsuda, convinces Ono that he will not be able to help the poor unless he helps create a stronger Japan. By creating propaganda Matsuda argues that Ono will help Japan become a great nation, “It’s time for us to forge an empire as powerful and wealthy as those of British and the French.”(176) Ono then embarks on a campaign with the Okada-Shingen Society. He begins to create propaganda for the Japanese war effort in China.

After the war Ono realizes that he has made mistakes based on the outcome of the war, “As far as I am concerned, I freely admit I made many mistakes, I accept that much of what I did was ultimately harmful to our nation, that mine was part of an influence that resulted in untold suffering of our own people.”(123) Ono is realistic and takes responsibility for his actions.

All artists have a responsibility for the message their art creates. I think that artists can choose to create art depicting both patriotism and hedonism; however they should be responsible for their decision. Artists should not be able wiggle out of the repercussions of their art.