Abstract

This article explores the complex relationship between socially engaged art, public funding, and political agendas within the United Kingdom. It addresses the central research question: to what extent can socially engaged art maintain its artistic autonomy while advancing political and community agendas? Using interpretive analysis that combines case studies and policy review informed by critical theory, the article examines examples such as the UNIQLO Tate Play commissions at Tate Modern, the Turner Prize, and the funding policies of Arts Council England during the New Labour and Coalition Government eras. Drawing on the theoretical debate between Claire Bishop and Grant Kester, the article examines tensions between autonomy, ethics, and participation in these examples. Furthermore, it posits alternative models of “militant art,” exemplified by collectives like Women on Waves, The Laboratory of Insurrectionary Imagination, the Voina Group, and Grupo Etcétera. These groups challenge dominant narratives by combining political commitment with artistic autonomy. The findings call for a more pluralistic understanding of socially engaged art—one that embraces both collaborative and confrontational practices while resisting institutional co-optation.