Art is moral passion married to entertainment. Moral passion without entertainment is propaganda, and entertainment without moral passion is television.

Rita Mae Brown (b. 1944) is an American novelist, essayist, and outspoken cultural critic whose work often blends political conviction with wit and popular storytelling. The aphorism reflects a late-20th-century debate about whether art should primarily instruct, agitate, or entertain—arguments sharpened by the rise of mass media and television as dominant cultural forms. Brown’s formulation fits her public persona as a writer who values both social engagement and narrative pleasure, and it echoes a broader tradition of artists insisting that serious moral purpose must be carried by compelling craft if it is to move audiences rather than merely lecture them.

The quote defines “art” as a fusion of ethical urgency (“moral passion”) and the ability to hold attention (“entertainment”). Brown warns that moral intensity without aesthetic appeal becomes propaganda—didactic messaging that coerces rather than persuades. Conversely, entertainment without moral stakes becomes empty diversion, epitomized here by “television,” used as shorthand for formulaic, commercially driven content. The underlying claim is that lasting art changes how people feel and think precisely because it is pleasurable, vivid, and engaging; craft and conscience are not rivals but partners. The line also challenges artists to avoid both preachiness and escapism.