All art is propaganda. ... The only difference is the type of propaganda. Since art is essential to human life, it cannot belong
to only a few. Art is the universal language and belongs to all humanity. All painters have been propagandists or they have not been painters. ... Every artist who has been worth something in art has been a propagandist. ... Every strong artist has been a propagandist. I want to be a propagandist and I don't want to be anything else. ... I want to use my art as a weapon. *what does the artist think?*
A. The artist thinks that propaganda is something that can convince people to think in a particular way. So your art can be used as a tool to communicate ideas to the public.
B. The artist thinks that propaganda is something that can hurt people like a weapon. So his art can be used as a tool to fight with the public.
C. The artist thinks that art is only for the best way to arm people. So your art can be used as a tool to communicate.
D. The artist thinks that art is a lie like all propaganda. Its value is in convincing people that government ideas are rarely good.
A. The artist thinks that propaganda is something that can convince people to think in a particular way. So your art can be used as a tool to communicate ideas to the public.
Explanation:
From the write-up, the artist is talking about propaganda and how all art has elements of propaganda in it.
He believes that any painter who has not been a propagandist has not been a painter because every artist "who has been worth something" and every "strong artist" has been a propagandist at one point or the other.
He wants to be a propagandist and use his art as a weapon that can be used to make people think in a particular way and communicate ideas to the public.
