The question that constitutes the title of this article is posed as a challenge not only to intellectuals, but to society as a whole. In its attempt to answer that question, Revista Flash decided to interview individuals in the art world, despite the suspicion that the answer may well lie beyond the confines of that sphere. The text supports the view of French writer Régis Debray when he states that the people whom the intelligentsia attempts to support should be the ones to determine how much actual assistance they receive from the intelligentsia. That formulation, though, is understood to be utopian: the people are largely illiterate and have limited access to the media. Furthermore, the middle class is accused of being conformist and the ruling sectors apathetic. The responses of those interviewed—sixteen artists and two critics—are placed in three groups: (1) those who support making art for the people, (2) those who support reaffirming identity, and (3) those who express concern for the specificity of art.

The context for the question formulated by the magazine is a specific period in Colombian art when explicitly political proposals and works were becoming more important. Opinions on the social role of the artist and of the work of art were often openly antagonistic. 

The most important aspect of the article concerns how the 16 artists and both critics responded during the interviews.  Their responses can be placed into three basic categories. A first group upholds the need to produce art that does not make reference to external models in order to prevent the ruling elites from controlling art and artists from losing sight of their responsibility to the medium in which they make their work. Indeed, some of those interviewed even claim that there is one art for the ruling classes and another for the oppressed classes. 

Another group of respondents addresses the need to pursue an authentic cultural identity capable of facilitating real communication with the public. Local values must be strengthened so that art is meaningful even though produced in a dependent society. Art incapable of taking in and valorizing what its context has to offer will never establish a relationship with the viewer. At the same time, the artist must be able to go beyond the immediacy of the moment.  

A third position asserts that the role of the artist is to make art, that is, to pursue the language of the purely visual in an attempt to awaken the passive viewer and to turn the experience of looking at art into an active undertaking.