Art is often created for the purpose of promoting social change. Other times, it causes change accidentally or in ways not intended by the artist. Consider, for example, Upton Sinclair's famous novel The Jungle. Sinclair meant for the novel to serve as social criticism, highlighting the plight of the American working class. Because his novel forced the American public to view uncensored the abject living and working conditions of the country's poverty-stricken citizens, then president Roosevelt authorized inspections which led to changes that eventually evolved into what is known today as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While not exactly the kind of change Sinclair had in mind when he self-published his novel over a century ago, this one artistic work caused change that still affects us in profound ways today.
It is highly doubtful that director Zack Snyder had such lofty intentions for his film 300. The controversies that arose in discussions about the film certainly didn't seem to indicate any postive changes for the US. In interviews, Snyder consistently denied any political agenda in light of current events and US relations with the Middle East. While his own political views likely influenced the creation of the film (in the way that our beliefs influence everything we do), we must either choose to take him at his word or not. Regardless of his intentions, the film definitely caused quite a stir around the world in light of the US occupation of multiple Middle Eastern countries including Iran. This particular work of art took on a life of its own. After all, once a film is released, the director cannot control how it will be interpreted by its many audiences. 300 certainly proved this. The film was praised for its high visual impact and special effects and criticized for such disparate reasons as mimicking the style of video games and being racist war propaganda. Somewhere in the middle of all that brouhaha Snyder's controversial film was contributing to serious political turmoil by poisoning the minds of Iranians against the US.
In the article "
300 Sparks an Outcry in Iran" featured in Time magazine just a few days after the film's release, Azadeh Moaven describes the political unrest
300 caused half a world away from its release in the US for the citizens of a country already in conflict with the United States. Imagine you were native-born citizen of Iran, Iraq, or even Afghanistan and you became aware of the monstrous portrayals of Persians in this American film. How would you react?
Conduct some internet research and find other films that have had a significant impact on US society. Considering the two examples discussed as well as others you know of or discovered through research examples of how narratives, both film and literature, have impacted the political climate of the US, how sensitive do you think directors should be to the social and political ramifications of the work they produce?