Art has no purpose other than to exist in a state of constant subjectivity, to the point that even a work of art's reason for having been made is down to personal opinion; it comes with no responsibility responsibility to teach or educate or inform. "Meaning", in Art, as is "Message", is abstract; it goes beyond narrative understanding or subtracting concrete intentions of authors.
It produces in us feelings of which only Nature is capable. In fact, I'd say Art is merely an internalisation of the external Nature in which it exists, in which it is created. It is an aesthetic, artificial response to the world, a reflection of its beauty, and yearning for comprehension of that beauty. Ugliness (racism in this case) is just an irregular form of beauty (human condition, nature, life in general, whatever that is supposed to be); because ugliness is mostly always considered something to "tackle" (hence "issue films" such as Crash and whatnot), many assume the films that do so are meant to, or are indeed supposed to, educate us and teach us all how to be better human beings. Whether or not they do is besides the point, since that would be down to audience involvement, not artistic intentions. We don't understand anything, so a work of art has no right, or responsibility, or qualification, to teach us.
So, to relate all of what I just said to what we're talking about, what, beyond "Racism is bad" (which is common sense anyway) does American History X "say" that Crash does not?
...dot com bold typeface rhetoric. You go clickety click and get your head split. 'The hell you look like on a message board Discussing whether or not the Brother is hardcore?
