Progressivism's relentless War on your Freedom and Liberty

[Martin Hash]

What happened around the middle of the 19th C. that gave birth to the ideas that the merit based ideas of the Great Awakening a century earlier should be rejected?

Around 1850 the ideas of Progressivism, Marxism and Modernism(art) start. All of them promise results without personal responsibility required by merit.

Modernism in art made me ask this question.
How is it low skilled artists gave us these abstract products and told us they were great works ? The Collectivist political ideologies of Progressivism and Marxism work the same way.

It's gamesmanship:
What would you do if you wanted to be an artist but only 1% of the artists were talented enough to make money?

[C-Mag]

I guess that one could argue that Western Culture had finally reached a point of excess wealth and rich kids with no talent or ambition were called artists to explain their lack of ambition or talent. Then wealthy friends and relatives bought their creations to support them.

Check out the remaking of Rockwells America
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/arts ... eedom.html

There is no art involved in this, just destruction of Rockwells work to promote a political agenda.

[Martin Hash]

I guess that one could argue that Western Culture had finally reached a point of excess wealth and rich kids with no talent or ambition were called artists to explain their lack of ambition or talent. Then wealthy friends and relatives bought their creations to support them.

Check out the remaking of Rockwells America
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/arts ... eedom.html

There is no art involved in this, just destruction of Rockwells work to promote a political agenda.

Even if you were talented, meritocracy is now totally dominated by the Nouveau Aristocracy who have hoarded all the opportunity; who's going to get the job, the competent kid or your nephew?

[C-Mag]

I agree.
We see it everywhere. Look at films, what was done to Art, Sculpture and Architecture has now been done to films.

[brewster]

Christ, don't you guys know there's no percentage in arguing about what's good art, bad art, or art at all? It's 100% subjective, art is whatever anyone says it is, and you'll never get anywhere saying it isn't! All you really need to know about art is that there is a common term "outsider art" for the kind of stuff made by some hick in a shack. What they don't even need to say is the rest is "insider art", where its all about who you know, not really about the work itself. A pile of your toenail clippings is art if you say it is, and will be exhibited if you know the right people. Took my kids to the MOMA and there was room wallpapered with dick cartoons, and another wallpapered in photos of of babies emerging from vaginas. Expose your kids to art!!

All this really has not much to do with politics except that it's just another pastime of the leisure class.

[C-Mag]

Isn't art supposed to elevate a culture. I'm not sure dick wallpaper or bloody vaginas does that.

[Martin Hash]

Isn't art supposed to elevate a culture. I'm not sure dick wallpaper or bloody vaginas does that.

Every watch a David Lynch movie; Blue Velvet, Eraserhead or Twin Peaks, for example. Those are NOT traditional story narratives but they do profoundly impact the viewer. His stories could not be read or heard; they MUST be watched. Some visual art is good enough to do that - you don’t have to like it but it still does what the artist intended.

Pretentious art says and does nothing, that’s how you know.

[MilSpecs]

Isn't art supposed to elevate a culture. I'm not sure dick wallpaper or bloody vaginas does that.

Find a museum that exhibits craft. I find it much more elevating than art, and I'm guessing you will too.

[Kath]

Christ, don't you guys know there's no percentage in arguing about what's good art, bad art, or art at all? It's 100% subjective, art is whatever anyone says it is, and you'll never get anywhere saying it isn't! All you really need to know about art is that there is a common term "outsider art" for the kind of stuff made by some hick in a shack. What they don't even need to say is the rest is "insider art", where its all about who you know, not really about the work itself. A pile of your toenail clippings is art if you say it is, and will be exhibited if you know the right people. Took my kids to the MOMA and there was room wallpapered with dick cartoons, and another wallpapered in photos of of babies emerging from vaginas. Expose your kids to art!!

All this really has not much to do with politics except that it's just another pastime of the leisure class.

Meh - I think an overwhelming majority would agree that the NEA funds shit that isn't art. I remember about 20 years ago, I heard on the radio (WGN was always on at my house,) that the NEA gave money to a guy who created a poem.

The poem?

E

No talent, no creativity, no meaning whatsoever, nothing to interpret/reflect on = NOT art.

[brewster]

The poem?

E

No talent, no creativity, no meaning whatsoever, nothing to interpret/reflect on = NOT art.

That just shows we don't understand minimalist art, and claiming ANYTHING is not art just exposes your ignorance!

The only time a drawing professor in design school ever held up my work as an example, the assignment had been a minimalist landscape. I do nothing very well, always have.