Dick,
That may very well have been the case. The power of such officials becomes a
problem only when they exert it over everyone rather than confining it to
their co-religionists. It isn't only the Roman Catholics who try to impose
their religious values on the whole country. The Evangelical Christians also
do this.
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of R. E. Driscoll Sr
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 1:45 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies, hypocrisy and
conformity'
Miriam:
Many of those of the Catholic Faith had implicit confidence in the
Cardinals, Bishops and Priests during the commenting duration of the Legion
of Decency.
Much of this high level of confidence has disappeared in recent years.
I really do not know why it is no longer in existence but if it were I
rather imagine that there would be a great deal of questioning in this time.
R. E. (Dick) Driscoll, Sr.
On 1/2/2016 10:18 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Yes, that was it. And it had a lot of power in the 50's and before.
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of R. E.
Driscoll Sr
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 10:51 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies,
hypocrisy and
conformity'
Miriam:
Was most likely "The Legion of Decency".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Legion_of_Decency
R. E. (Dick) Driscoll, Sr.
On 1/2/2016 9:06 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Thee was this Catholic group, the something or other of
decency. I
can't
remember its entire name. But Carl, I'm sure you remember
that this
group
ruled on what was and was not permitted in movies and on TV.
All
those rules
have since disappeared or rather, changed radically. But
certain
words still
can't be uttered on the radio, not even in quotes. Given the
fact
that we
have a violence and sex obsessed society, I think these
pretenses
are
bizarre.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 1:21 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with
lies,
hypocrisy and
conformity'
Speaking of TV and movies not allowing "mixed" Race
relations, I
remember
that the old movies and early TV did not permit husbands and
wives
to sleep
together in the same bed. Remember Lucy and Dezzi?
Twin beds! A Hot Blooded Cuban and a Red Head? Come on!
And I sure do remember the first Gay couple on TV. Good for
the
Daytime
Soaps!
But back to Lucy and Dezzi. Husbands and wives had slept
together
forever.
Was Art imitating customs? Prudishness seemed to dictate
who got to
sleep
where and with whom.
But it's confusing. Is the Art dictating, or is custom
calling the
shots?
It's after ten in the evening and time to quit wandering
about in
the back
rooms of my brain.
Good night all.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/1/16, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Remember that I said that art is pattern, but that
the kind
of art you
like is a pattern of patterns that have been
imprinted on
you because
you identify it with some culture, subculture or
ideology to
which you
have identified yourself. If the patterns or
patterns of
patterns do
not meet what patterns of art have been imprinted on
you
then whether
you recognize the patterns as patterns or not you
are not
going to be
likely to like the art unless you like it only as an
exotic
novelty.
It is similar to Carl's music of the forties. I can
easily
recognize
the patterns that identify it to me as music and
while I
can't say
that I actively dislike it, I don't particularly
like it
either. On
the other hand, if I heard a train wreck I just
might be
able to
identify it as a train wreck, but it would be very
unlikely
that I
would even think of it as being music. It is
unpatterned, so
I would
call it the noise of a train wreck. And by the way,
if I saw
those
milk cartons I don't think I would regard them as
attractive
art
either even if I did see a pattern in them.
On 1/1/2016 3:19 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Well, I've heard music in which the patterns
are
quite recognizeable,
and I didn't like the music, even though I
heard the
patterns. And, I
like some popular music that I heard when I
was a
child, way under 14
years of age, during World War 2. And I like
classical music that was
composed in Europe in the 17th, 18th, and
19th
centuries. I was in a
museum, perhaps in Boston, I'm not sure, and
I saw
an art exhibition
which consisted of empty caartons which once
held
milk bottles. They
were made of wood and were painted black,
and they
were stacked one
upon another, many stacks of them. I could
see them
quite well and
there was certainly a pattern, and perhaps
those
cartons symbolized
something to the artist who painted and
piled them
up, but to me,
they were just what they were and they meant
nothing
at all.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Roger
Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81" for
DMARC)
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2016 2:20 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is
incompatible
with lies,
hypocrisy and conformity'
Art is pattern. This includes visual and
audio art,
also known as music.
I suppose it might also apply to the other
three
senses, but it is
harder to create something in a pattern for
touch,
taste and smell,
even though some chefs do consider
themselves to be
artists. In
visual art a pattern of colors, lines or
whatever is
created that the
structure of our brains happen to find
pleasing. In
the case of music
it is a pattern of sound. These patterns can
be
highly variable to
the point of near infinitude, so there are
also
patterns of patterns.
The patterns of patterns that are found to
be
pleasurable vary from
culture to culture and may vary from
subculture to
subculture and
from individual to individual. I have
personally
observed that the
favored patterns of patterns seem to be
imprinted on
people when they
are in the age range of about fourteen to
eighteen.
That is, once one
is exposed to a certain genre of music or
school of
visual art while
in that age range it becomes what one favors
for
life. In my case,
for example, I became interested in heavy
metal rock
at that age. I
think it had something to do with both what
I was
being exposed to
and the subcultures with which I was
identifying at
the time. For
years now I have paid very little attention
to music
at all, but if I
do hear various samples of music in my daily
life I
perk up and
notice and like it if I happen to hear some
heavy
metal. I have
certain ideas of visual art that I like and
had
imprinted on me at
the same time too. I favor the kind of art
that used
to appear on the
covers of fantasy paperback novels. I say
used to
because I know
things like that change over time and I have
not
seen the cover of a
paperback book for many years now. In
general I
prefer more abstract
art than realistic art. Of course, I am
talking
about personal
preference, but I have noticed that most
everyone's
personal
preferences were formed at about the same
time in
life and had
something to do with not only what they were
exposed
to, but to what
subcultural milieu they identified with. On
a
worldwide basis few
people really like the art and music from
another
part of the world,
but they are often attracted to it as an
exotic
novelty. The main
point of art, though, is that it must be
patterned.
If you hear sound
without pattern it is called noise. If you
see
something visually
with no pattern it is called a mess.
And even though a lot of people like
sophisticated
art - that is, art
with highly complex patterns - if the
patterns
become too complex to
the point that the pattern cannot be
discerned
quickly then it is
rejected as art and called noise or a mess.
I think
I have seen that
tendency even when the pattern is not overly
complex, but just alien.
For example, I have ever so often heard the
music
that I favor called
noise. What I think is going on is that the
person
who says that is
not used to it and so does not detect the
patterns
immediately. The
patterns are too complex to be picked out
immediately when hearing
something that to them is unusual.
An alien music that is simple might be
recognized as
music, but add
complexity to it being alien and it will be
heard as
noise while the
person who is used to it and has it
imprinted on him
or her will
clearly hear music and enjoyable music too.
On 1/1/2016 12:43 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I have attended college and graduate
school
and I read lots of books.
I've visited museums and been to
europe, in
particular, to Italy
twice. And i don't have a clue about
what
art truly is. I know what
music I enjoy hearing and what music
I don't
like and what I like
includes folk, country, popular
songs from
the days before rock and
roll, and some classical music. My
appreciation of the visual arts
was hampered by poor vision, but I
did like
impressionist paintings,
and paintings that tended toward
being
representational. On some of
the trips arrange for blind people
in which
I participated, I was
subjected to art and explanations of
art by
specialists in various
museums, and I always felt like the
specialists were being
patronizing and I was being stupid.
I've
read a number of novels
which dealt with the experience of
artists,
particularly
contemporary artists and the ways in
which
they express themselves
in various art forms. I haven't been
able to
truly relate to most of
what I've read. I'm aware that what
artists
do is related to, and
influenced by the societyies in
which they
live and the culture that
informs their sensibilities. And I
know that
some governments have
used art as propaganda. Also, many
years
ago, I had friends who were
professional classical musicians.
Some of their friends made a steady
living
as music teachers in
public schools and they played in
orchestras
at concerts when they
were able to get this work. My
friends did
not have steady teaching
jobs. They might teach at a
community
college for a semester or at a
music school, but making a living
involved a
constant scramble for
work. It meant networking and
staying alert
to every possibility for
making a bit of money. True, after a
concert, there was some
discussion about the skill or lack
thereof,
of other musicians, but
I don't think I ever heard a
discussion of
music per se. I assume
that most of us on this
list are somewhere at the same level as I am
in
terms of
understanding true art or what makes an
artist.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From:
blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl ;
Jarvis
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2016 11:34
AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] [blind-democracy]
'Art is
incompatible with lies,
hypocrisy and
conformity'
Good New Years Day Alice and All,
Probably I haven't much of a grasp
on
anything. Take my theories
regarding the Creation of God, or my
grasp
on the need to have a one
people, one people's government and
a united
respect for all life,
World.
No grasp on any of those topics, and
many
other crazy notions I
conjure
up.
But then I also don't have much of a
grasp
on this blind democracy
list, either. I figured we might
simply
toss out ideas and explore
our thinking, rather than make
character
judgements. Most of what I
put out on this list is straight off
the top
of my mind. I don't
often research my opinions, nor do I
expect
you all to do likewise.
So having babbled around for a
while, I want
to return to this topic
of
artistic sensibilities.
Art is created within the brain of
individuals. Some folks are far
more creative and talented than
others.
Still, even the most
creative are influenced by the world
around
them. In some cultures
art is
encouraged.
This was the case in the early days
of this
nation. But Madison
Avenue, an Oligarchy form of
government, a
Corporate Empire,
pressure to seek financial gain as a
measure
of success, and much
more have warped what we consider to
be Art,
or Creative Talent.
Indeed, we are far closer to the
Roman
Empire in our creative
talents, than to the Glory
Days of Greece.
So is this what was bothering you,
Alice?
If so, then I stand on my
statement.
By the way, anyone wanting to set me
straight privately, or tell me
to shut up, can do so privately. I
am at:
carjar82@xxxxxxxxx
Carl Jarvis, who is heading for a
bacon and
egg and toast with jam
breakfast. First one of the new
year.
Hopefully not the last.
On 12/31/15, Alice Dampman Humel
<alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I'm afraid you do not have a
very
good grasp on artistic
sensibilities,
personalities,
expressions, lives, etc.
No artist worth his/her salt
will be
stifled. alice On Dec 31,
2015, at 11:12 AM, Carl
Jarvis
<carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> <mailto:carjar82@xxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> <mailto:carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is hard for me to imagine
what
pure art would look like in a
Land that is so controlled
that the
Masters corrupt artistic
expression, or stifle it
altogether.
Freedom of expression is not
to be
tolerated by the Empire.
Carl Jarvis
On 12/31/15, Roger Loran
Bailey
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
http://themilitant.com/2016/8001/800149.html
The Militant (logo)
Vol. 80/No. 1 January
4, 2016
(Books of the Month column)
'Art is incompatible with
lies,
hypocrisy and conformity'
Art and Revolution by
Leon
Trotsky, a central leader of the
1917 October Revolution, is
one of
the Books of the Month for
December.
From the vantage point of
a leader
in the early Soviet republic
along with V.I. Lenin, and
then its
defender against the
political counterrevolution
after
Lenin died led by Joseph Stalin
and the bureaucracy he spoke
for,
Trotsky examines the place of
art and artistic creation in
building a new, socialist society.
Expelled from the Soviet
Union in
1929, Trotsky got asylum in
1936 in Mexico with the aid
of Diego
Rivera, the country's
leading artist. The excerpt
is from
"Art and Politics in Our
Epoch," originally published
as a
letter to the August
1938 Partisan Review, a
political
and cultural magazine published
in the U.S. Copyright C 1970
by
Pathfinder Press. Reprinted by
permission.
BY LEON TROTSKY
You have been kind enough
to
invite me to express my views on
the state of present-day
arts and
letters. I do this not without
some hesitation. Since my
book
Literature and Revolution (1923),
I have not once returned to
the
problem of artistic creation and
only occasionally have I
been able
to follow the latest
developments in this sphere.
I am
far from pretending to offer an
exhaustive reply.
The task of this letter is
to
correctly pose the question.
Generally speaking, art is
an
expression of man's need for a
harmonious and complete
life, that
is to say, his need for those
major benefits of which a
society of
classes has deprived him.
That is why a protest
against
reality, either conscious or
unconscious, active or
passive,
optimistic or pessimistic, always
forms part of a really
creative
piece of work. Every new tendency
in art has begun with
rebellion.
Bourgeois society showed its
strength throughout long periods of
history in the fact that,
combining
repression and encouragement,
boycott and flattery, it was
able to
control and assimilate every
"rebel" movement in art and
raise it
to the level of official
"recognition." But each time
this
"recognition" betokened, when
all is said and done, the
approach
of trouble. It was then that
from the left wing of the
academic
school or below it - i.e.,
from the ranks of a new
generation
of bohemian artists - a
fresher revolt would surge
up to
attain in its turn, after a
decent interval, the steps
of the
academy. Through these stages
passed classicism,
romanticism,
realism, naturalism, symbolism,
impressionism, cubism,
futurism. .
Nevertheless, the union of
art and
the bourgeoisie remained
stable, even if not happy,
only so
long as the bourgeoisie itself
took the initiative and was
capable
of maintaining a regime both
politically and morally
"democratic." This was a question of not
only giving free rein to
artists and
playing up to them in every
possible way, but also of
granting
special privileges to the top
layer of the working class,
and of
mastering and subduing the
bureaucracy of the unions
and
workers' parties. All these
phenomena exist in the same
historical plane.
The decline of bourgeois
society
means an intolerable
exacerbation of social
contradictions, which are transformed
inevitably into personal
contradictions, calling forth an ever
more burning need for a
liberating
art. Furthermore, a declining
capitalism already finds
itself
completely incapable of offering
the minimum conditions for
the
development of tendencies in art
which correspond, however
little, to
our epoch. It fears
superstitiously every new
word, for
it is no longer a matter of
corrections and reforms for
capitalism but of life and death. The
oppressed masses live
their own life.
Bohemianism offers too
limited a
social base. Hence new
tendencies take on a more
and more
violent character, alternating
between hope and despair. .
The October Revolution gave
a
magnificent impetus to all types of
Soviet art. The bureaucratic
reaction, on the contrary, has
stifled artistic creation
with a
totalitarian hand. Nothing
surprising here!
Art is basically a function
of the
nerves and demands complete
sincerity. Even the art of
the court
of absolute monarchies was
based on idealization but
not on
falsification. The official art
of the Soviet Union - and
there is
no other over there -
resembles totalitarian
justice, that
is to say, it is based on
lies and deceit. The goal of
justice, as of art, is to exalt the
"leader,"
to fabricate a heroic myth.
Human
history has never seen anything
to equal this in scope and
impudence. .
The style of present-day
official
Soviet painting is called
"socialist realism." The
name itself
has evidently been invented
by some high functionary in
the
department of the arts. This
"realism"
consists in the imitation of
provincial daguerreotypes of the
third quarter of the last
century;
the "socialist" character
apparently consists in
representing,
in the manner of pretentious
photography, events which
never took
place. It is impossible to
read Soviet verse and prose
without
physical disgust, mixed with
horror, or to look at
reproductions
of paintings and sculpture in
which functionaries armed
with pens,
brushes, and scissors, under
the supervision of
functionaries
armed with Mausers, glorify the
"great" and "brilliant"
leaders,
actually devoid of the least
spark of genius or
greatness. The
art of the Stalinist period
will remain as the frankest
expression of the profound decline of
the proletarian revolution.
.
The real crisis of
civilization is
above all the crisis of
revolutionary leadership.
Stalinism
is the greatest element of
reaction in this crisis.
Without a
new flag and a new program it
is impossible to create a
revolutionary mass base; consequently
it is impossible to rescue
society
from its dilemma. But a truly
revolutionary party is
neither able
nor willing to take upon
itself the task of "leading"
and
even less of commanding art,
either before or after the
conquest
of power. Such a pretension
could only enter the head of
a
bureaucracy - ignorant and
impudent, intoxicated with
its
totalitarian power - which has
become the antithesis of the
proletarian revolution. Art, like
science, not only does not
seek
orders, but by its very essence,
cannot
tolerate them.
Artistic creation has its
laws -
even when it consciously serves
a social movement. Truly
intellectual creation is incompatible
with lies, hypocrisy and the
spirit
of conformity. Art can become
a strong ally of revolution
only
insofar as it remains faithful
to itself. Poets, painters,
sculptors and musicians will
themselves find their own
approach
and methods, if the struggle
for freedom of oppressed
classes and
peoples scatters the clouds
of skepticism and of
pessimism which
cover the horizon of
mankind. The first condition
of this
regeneration is the
overthrow of the domination
of the
Kremlin
bureaucracy.
Front page (for this issue)
| Home |
Text-version home
________________________________
Avast logo <http://www.avast.com/> <http://www.avast.com/> This
email has been checked for
viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/> <http://www.avast.com/>
________________________________
Avast logo <http://www.avast.com/> This email has been checked for
viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
