I believe @LilouandJohn recently discussed whether moral messages have a place in art. I have made a thread about this on a previous account, but my views have changed a little since. However, I still believe the assumption that moral messages take away from art is incorrect.

This assumption is easy to understand, as leftist virtue signalling often seems to degrade the media in which it resides. However, I believe this to be the result of the inherent antagonism between the leftist ideology and the natural world (and thus, all that we find beautiful).

As with all things, incorporating a message into art requires skill, and if the aesthetic side of the art is neglected as a result, both the message and the aesthetic appeal in the art suffer. However, it would be a fallacy to consider the message within the art separately...

...from the art itself. This is because all aspects of a work of art are interconnected, and the aesthetic aspect of the art can influence the eay the message is perceived, and vice versa. For example, a happy song with a dark message can give a distinctly unsettling feeling...

...which is different from each of the aspects taken seperately. On the other hand, if each aspect works together, the art can reach new heights. For example, consider @The_Decency's "It's Okay to be White." The instruments and vocals can evoke a hopeful and upbeat feeling...

...on their own, but the message of the song pairs so well with the aesthetics of the song that it rises above the sum of it's parts. The point of all this being that moral or ideological messages do not inherently degrade art, and attempts to completely avoid making a moral...

...statement can actually become degraded as a result. Case in point: Modern art and similar avant-garde art movements. Kazimir Malevich's painting "Black Square" is one of the most extreme of this type of art. The main idea/feeling this painting evokes is... nothing.

Malevich succeeds in completely baffling the viewer, as they look for a meaning that isnt there. However, this did not create the most pure form of art possible, but something on the very edge of what could even be considered art.

Likewise, John Cage attempted to remove all personal bias he might put into his music by writing his "Music of Changes" based on a chinese divination text, the "I Ching." This, of course, produced a completely random and incomprehensible series of notes.

I doubt that anyone believes that art should go very far in that direction, but it can sometimes be difficult to remove messages from art without also compromising the aesthetic value of the art. This is because both the message and the aesthetic value are connected

... to the feeling that the artist tries to evoke with their art. Many times, the artist does not explicity put a message into their art, but a message can often be implicit due to art's inherent connection to the artist themselves. In short, a message can often elevate art...

...rather than degrade it, and attempting to separate all moral messages from art can result in something lacking in meaning.