Utopian or Dystopian Art ?

As a minority artist, would you prefer to create utopic works of art over dystopian ones?

There are many layers to such a decision. As an artist, one might have multitude reasons to create art - commercial purpose, fame, to record history, motivational tools etc.

One might argue that since art has cognitive value creating dystopian art creates traction because of the sense of relatability. To portray what is closer to reality creates recognition and awareness both among the minority and the majority. Art thus becomes a medium to express voice, legitimize protests and gain community support. However there are two sides of a coin.

In a world of self awareness by the minorities, utopian works of art have an aspirational value, a sense of hope and a push towards a better future. Psychologically, a utopian reality portrayed and consumed by all creates a shift in the bias and normalizes equalization. It creates a world of hope and belief for the minority which was inaccessible before.

Given the binary we exist in today, the same piece of art is viewed differently by the majority and the minority. For a person of privilege, being painted as the worst and the ultimate villain might lead to more ignorance rather than any positive change. Whereas with little means of turning the face away from reality in a consumerist capitalistic world, utopic art creates a sense of hopeful escapism, although temporary.

Given the binary, what would you prefer?