For a long time, artists do not explain or take responsibility for their works and actions, which results in certain consequences. It is the exact question to be discussed in Responsibility of the Artists. Why can the avant-garde school of modern art stay immune from judgment, the logic of usefulness and even the obligation to give back to the community? Does it mean that artists can be simply irresponsible? The immunity is related to the privileges that the avant-garde school enjoys for a century, for the avant-garde school has once been considered as representative of progress and revolution. Claire's historical analysis shows that the avant-garde school does not only shape itself according to the prototype of political utopia, both the far-left and far-right politics; vice-versa, it provides political utopia with basic principles. Equally violent, avant-garde school and such political utopia are resentful of traditional culture. Since the 1960s, anti-humanism has been established as the guiding principle for actions. La Responsabilite de L’artiste outlines a kind of degenerate historical pedigree. The disputes and debates on the nature and criteria of contemporary art have lasted for a long time. In a world featuring “déresponsabilisation”, should artists bear more responsibilities than ordinary people? The author emphasizes the “face-to-face” ethical relationship between “me” and “others”, which may arouse our deep thoughts.
