On 1/4/16, Alice Dampman Humel <alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
are you sure about that? I did not read it that way, either.One person's inspiring art is another person's rock.
And the rock sounds like an example of abstract, non-representational art,
and abstract art, indeed, abstraction in any form, can express a hell of a
lot...
On Jan 4, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
He was referring to representational art that makes a point and he was
making a joke.
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: Sunday, January 03, 2016 10:26 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies, hypocrisy
and
conformity'
That does not make sense. There is a piece of sculpture in front of the
library in my town. I saw it many times before I lost my eyesight and I
can
see that it is what most everyone would call art. It is a rock that has
been
sculpted into a pattern, but it is not a representation of anything real
like a statue would be. The pattern is clear, though, and it is an
example
of art. Can I agree with it? I don't see how anyone could either agree or
disagree with it. It is just a carved piece of rock. It is not expressing
an
opinion nor is it making a statement that is factual or false. It just
is.
There is nothing about it that tries to persuade anyone of anything, so I
don't see how it could be propaganda even if someone could figure out a
way
to disagree with it.
On 1/3/2016 10:34 AM, Frank Ventura wrote:
When you agree with something it is art, when you don't its propaganda.and conformity'
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Sunday, January 3, 2016 10:02 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies, hypocrisy
the negative definition of propaganda, than I suppose the Fascists would
Well, that's a famous painting and everyone thinks it's art. If we
accept
have considered it to be propaganda back then.
and conformity'
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Abby
Vincent
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 10:54 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies, hypocrisy
that he might have seen the world that way.
YYes. A lot ofPicasso's art was one dimensional. It never occurred to
me
living things".
"Guernica", a depiction of the horrors of the Spanish civil war, was
his protest against war with mass civilion casualties. It was drawings
of body parts. If art expresses an opinion, is it still art and not
propaganda
propaganda? Same question for "War is not healthy for children and other
and conformity'
Abby
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alice
Dampman Humel
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 6:05 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies, hypocrisy
only with cruelty and utter lack of imagination, sensitivity, creativity,
the cluelessness of that teacher has nothing to do with art, but rather
all essential components of artistic expression. It is nothing short of
tragic that his/her treatment of you led to your abandonment of art in
any
or all of its manifestations.
Picasso had some kind of visual conditions that made them see,
It has been posited, for example, that great artists like el Greco and
experience,
and express the world in the way they painted it.
difficult to
On Jan 2, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Abby Vincent <aevincent@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I was taught in the classroom activity called art made it
appreciate what we're talking about now. I never had twodimensional
vision. Our teacher tried to teach us how to depict dimension on aflat
paper. There were four shapes placed on a table. We were givenvalue
paper
and charcoal and told to draw them. The charcoal helped to show
shading.
I was told my shadows were in the wrong place and going in the wrong
direction. So, the art of sighted kids is real,
So it is art. The experience of a partially sighted kid has no
because it's wrong. I developed a lack of confidence in my abilityto know
and share what was around me. It carried over to the moresubjective
studies such as literature and poetry. I concentrated on math andsocial
studies and later, French.Vieni
Abby
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 1:55 PMhypocrisy and
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies,
conformity'Grapes
Roger,
I'll start with your last point. I don't remember that scene in The
of Wrath. To me, the art of the book is in the way that he tells thestory
of what happens to the family. The book communicates on two levels:had to
the
intellectual one, i.e. what it was like for this family when they
leave their farm and travel west, looking for work, at a time wheneveryone
else was also leaving the Dust Bowl and traveling west. And itcommunicates
on an emotional level. I felt terrible for the family, for what theyhad to
go through, for what was happening to them. For me, one of the mostmoving
passages is when they're in a barn and no one has anything to eat,and they
encounter a stranger there who is hungrier than they are. I won'ttell you
what happens because maybe you'll decide to read the book.that there
Now, as to symbolism. I don't get it either. But I will tell you
are a lot of wonderful books that are art because of how effectivelythey
communicate to the reader, and I don't pay attention to the opinionsof
critics or literature professors when I make that judgement. I knowthat a
book is really good because of my reading experience and my ownassessment
of the writing. Also, there are times when I can tell that a bookis
written very well, that it is fine literature, but I don't enjoy itand I
stop reading it. However, I don't assume that because I don't likethe book,
it's worthless. I've learned that there are limitations to myability to
appreciate certain kinds of literature. I've heard interviews withauthors
and it turns out that often, the authors did not have all of thesymbolism
in mind that the interviewers and other self styled experts,attribute to
their books.funny. I
Last but not least, poetry. There are all different kinds of poetry.
Poetry
is not always symbolic. Some of it is very literal. Some of it is
have never, however, chosen of my own volition, to read a book ofpoetry.
But I read a very long poem in high school which I loved, and Ihaven't
looked at it since. I think that, perhaps, you might appreciate itif you
can find it. It is, "The People, Yes" by Carl Sandberg. See if youcan find
it and read it. It is not flowery or symbolic. If I remembercorrectly from
so many years ago, it should be right up your alley. By the way,did you
ever have to read The Illiad in high school or college? It is thestory of
Ulysises' long trip home from the Peloponesian Wars and it is inverse.
There's another one, I think about Helen of Troy.Loran
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)hypocrisy and
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2016 4:11 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with lies,
conformity'characterized
I suppose I could include poetry as art. Like I said, art is
by patterns that are imparted to it by the artist and in all themeters and
rhymes poetry does have patterns. As a means of communication,though, it is
terrible. As I understand poetry it is virtually required for it tobe good
poetry for it to be filled with symbolism and then it is supposed tobe
better poetry if the symbolism is represented by more symbolism andthat the
more layers of symbolism the better the poetry is. This sounds likea word
puzzle and if it was a word puzzle it would have more legitimacy. Iused to
enjoy working crossword puzzles and acrostics. I have even in thepast
bought entire puzzle magazines full of word puzzles and logicproblems. It
can be a fun pastime. However, another thing I have always heardabout
poetry is that anyone's interpretation is just as good as anotherperson's
interpretation. That removes all the rules from the puzzle andrenders it
not a puzzle at all. If your solution to the puzzle is correct nomatter
what it is then you have not solved anything and you may as welljust make
up interpretations. I could spend all day making up interpretationsand I
would not even have to read the poem. I could skip the poem entirelyand
just write up an interpretation for a poem that I had no idea ofwhat was in
it and my interpretation would be as good as that of anyone whocarefully
read it. But if the author has anything to actually say then he orshe is
defeating him or herself. If you hide what you have to say behind alot of
symbolism then you have not communicated. I remember being in anEnglish
class once and we were studying a unit on poetry and I wasexpressing some
of these same views.problem with
I was saying that if you have something to say then what is the
just coming out and saying it instead of engaging in deliberatesome
obscurantism. The teacher decided to try a bit of comparing to show
advantage to poetry. She read a line of poetry. I forget now how itwas
worded, but she then translated it into straight prose saying howwould this
sound. The translation was, the ship came over the horizon. Myresponse was,
it wasn't worth saying in the first place. I really was notintending to be
funny, but the classroom burst into laughter.forms of
Anyway, if some people enjoy poetry for the patterns like they do a
painting, a sculpture or a piece of music then that is okay. Those
art don't do a lot of communicating either. And, in fact, in certainforms I
can enjoy poetry too. A song is a poem accompanied by music and, infact, in
a song the human voice can be regarded as another instrumentcontributing to
the patterns that make music art. There are certainly songs that Ilike. In
that sense I enjoy poetry. But I have still noticed that when youstrip a
song of its music and just read the words straight forward as youwould read
a poem songs are simplistic nonsense.that a
They really do not convey much meaning. So, insofar as anyone claims
poem is communicating some profound message I think they aredeluded.
As for prose literature being art, like I have said, when I haveread
fiction that has been identified as art I usually find myselfreading
something else that is obscurantist. This is the kind of fictionthat wins
awards and I suspect that it is because it is full of symbolismagain and
deliberately filling something up with symbolism serves no realpurpose but
to make it hard to understand. You used The Grapes of Wrath as anexample. I
will have to admit that I have never read that one. It is famousenough that
I have an idea of what it is about and I think it might be somethingthat I
might like to read, but I have just never gotten around to it. I didread a
fairly long excerpt though. I was reading an anthology of naturewriting and
the scene from The Grapes of Wrath describing the turtle crossingthe road
was included. I remember when I was in high school there was afellow
student exclaiming about how John Steinbeck could write about aturtle
crossing a road and make it interesting. It took me decades beforeI
finally got around to reading that scene, though, and it was becauseit was
a part of that nature writing anthology. It was interesting if onlymildly
interesting to me. It struck me as a straight forward narrativethough. If
there was any hidden symbolism in it I did not detect it and I didnot look
for it. Insofar as I found it interesting it was because it was astraight
forward narrative. If it had been written in a way such that it hadbeen
hard to understand I would not have found it interesting. So I ask,did you
find that part of the novel to be art and if you did what about itmade it
art? Bearing in mind that I have not read the rest of the book, butdo have
an idea of what it is about, what made the book as a whole art?blind spot.
On 1/2/2016 9:55 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I think that this is, you should excuse the expression, your
Certainly, literature is categorized as art and certainly,poetry is art.
Although you and I may not appreciate poetry, very manyintelligent
and sophisticated, and not so sophisticated people do. Thereare all
kinds of poetry, some easier for me to understand thanothers. Whole
stories have been told in verse like the famous Greek onesand
Evangeline or, The People, Yes. As for fiction not beinginformative
or being poor fiction if it is, that is a very debateableopinion.
John Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath is a wonderful novel. It'sart. And
it was written to inform about what was happening tomidwestern farm
Roger Loran
families during the Depression.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)lies,
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2016 11:40 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible with
hypocrisy and conformity'any book.
I don't discount it. I suppose you can learn something from
The difference is that in fiction the learning isincidental. The main
purpose of a work of fiction is to entertain. Insofar as awork of
fiction tries to teach rather than entertain it becomes poorwriting
and the more it strives to educate the poorer the writingbecomes. If
your intention is to be entertained you read a novel and ifyou are
lucky you just might learn something along the way. If yourintention
is to learn something you do not go to a work of fiction. Asfor
fiction being art, I have heard that many times and I thinkit is
loose use of the word art. However the books that are mostfrequently
called works of art are the ones that it is hard to read.effort to
Poetry is
frequently called art and it strikes me as a deliberate
obscure and to make it hard for the reader to understand.tends to be
The prose
that is called art suffers from the same kind of thing. It
dense, to make little sense and to be less than entertainingto myself
atnot being art.
least.
On 1/1/2016 11:02 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Many people would disagree with you about writing
Probably most of the books that I read aren't art,but great
literaturethat appears in
surely is.
And don't discount the information about real life
fiction that told me
novels.
I've read pieces of fiction and pieces of non
precisely the same things about certain issues. Butfilm has
certainly been used very effectively, as has alsovideo on TV and now
the internet, to influence people's point of view.and emotionally
Often, it works
better than words because people respond immediately
to what they see and they don't have to read or tryto comprehend a
spoken argument. I suspect that Trump is assuccessful as he is
because he uses few words to create images inpeople's heads, like
Mexican rapists or Muslims celebrating on 9/11.Behalf Of Roger
People aren't
persuaded by his
arguments. They just envision what he says.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" forwith lies,
DMARC)
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2016 9:21 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is incompatible
hypocrisy and conformity'novels. That is fiction.
Don't forget that you said that you are reading
And also don't confuse writing with art. Writingactually
communicates and so it is an excellent medium forpropaganda.
Nevertheless, nothing else of what you said refutesthat art is used
to reinforce concepts that have already beeninculcated by other
means. Persuasion comes first, then reinforcement.out against the
Note that in the
article that started this thread Trotsky is coming
misuses of art that you describevarious authoritarian states,
from your novels.
On 1/1/2016 4:14 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I've read fiction that takes place in
nazi gtermany, the Soviet Union for example,and in those books,
I've read descriptions of how writers andvisual artists and song
writers were used to support the mindsetthat the State wanted the
people to have. Certain kinds of books andmusic were forbidden.
Artists were encouraged to produce worksthat glorified the
political theories that underlay thegovernment. And here in the US,
there are people who want to forbid certainkinds of art. There was
a big fuss about an art piece in Brooklynseveral years ago because
some people considered it to be antiChristian. And remember those
hooten annies Ibut that's not exactly
mentioned?
They were advertised as folk song concerts
what they were. They were socialist orcommunist talking points
interspersed with songs. And then there wasthe rule that
interracialshown in films or
relationships between men and women could never be
ondecency and acceptable
TV.
Art is used to support conceptions of public
behavior.incompatible with lies,
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 3:18 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'Art is
hypocrisy and conformity'who said that she didn't
My comments were made in response to Miriam
know what art is, so I explained what it is,basically patterns of
just about anything. I forgot to mentionsomething else, though. She
also said that art was used as propaganda. Idon't think that is true.
Propaganda is an argument intended topersuade someone of something.
As an attempt to persuade propaganda isusually written as an essay
with evidence to back up the main argument.put is simply,
It is usually explained
by contrasting it to agitation. That is, to
propaganda makes a lot of points for a fewpeople and agitation
makes one or a very few points to bedistributed to many people.
Rather than get involved in explaining thatin greater detail just
try to think of theeither agitation nor
implications of that simplistic way of putting it.
With that in mind, though, art is not really
propaganda. It is reinforcement. Bear inmind what I have already
said about how one's taste in art - that is,one's affinity for
patterns of patterns - is acquired. Thatshows that by the time a
person has fixed on a particular genre ofart the person is already
persuaded of the ideology or other milieu ofthinking that the genre
of art is identified with. By indulging inappreciating the art one
is persistently reminded of what one hasalready been persuaded of.
That is, one is reinforced. Think ofmedieval European art. It is
almost all religious art. But can you reallyimagine anyone who has
not already been indoctrinated in thereligion being persuaded by
looking at the art? It neither persuades asit would if it was
propaganda nor doesagitation.
it compel one to take action as it would if it was
glad that I was born long,
On 1/1/2016 2:49 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
Very interesting, Roger.
All I can say is that I am so very
longothers choices in music, but
before Heavy Metal.
Actually, my brother-in-law, who
just turned 65, immerses himself
in Heavy Metal. I never criticize
I'll get down with Benny Goodman orElla Fitzgerald. Cathy leans
toward the pop music of the 60's and70's, and leaves the room if I
stay with the 40's too long. As yousaid, it's what we grew up on.
There is no, "Better" nor is there,"Worse". In music appreciation
it is that which is pleasing to theear of the listener.
and audio art, also known as
Carl Jarvis
On 1/1/16, Roger Loran Bailey
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Art is pattern. This includes visual
other three senses, but it is
music.
I suppose it might also apply to the
harder to create something in acolors, lines or whatever is
pattern for touch, taste and
smell, even though some chefs do
consider themselves to be
artists. In visual art a pattern of
created that the structure of ourbrains happen to find pleasing.
In the case of music it is a patternof sound. These patterns can
be highly variable to the point ofnear infinitude, so there are
also patterns offound to be pleasurable vary
patterns.
The patterns of patterns that are
from culture to culture and may varyfrom subculture to subculture
and from individual to individual. Ihave personally observed that
the favored patterns of patternsabout fourteen to eighteen.
seem to be imprinted on people
when they are in the age range of
Thatgenre of music or school of
is, once one is exposed to a certain
visual art while in that age rangeit becomes what one favors for
life. In my case, for example, Inow I have paid very little
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
attention to music at all, but if Ido hear various samples of
music in my daily life I perk up andnotice and like it if I
happen tothat I like and had imprinted
hear some heavy metal.
I have certain ideas of visual art
on me at the same time too. I favorthe kind of art that used to
appear on the covers of fantasyfor many years now. In general
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
I prefer more abstract art thanbut I have noticed that most
realistic art. Of course, I am
talking about personal preference,
everyone's personal preferences wereformed at about the same time
in life and had something to do withnot only what they were
exposed to, but to what subculturalmilieu they identified with.
On a worldwide basis few peopleare often attracted to it as
really like the art and music from
another part of the world, but they
an exotic novelty. The main point ofart, though, is that it must
be patterned. If you hear soundno pattern it is called a
without pattern it is called noise.
If you see something visually with
mess.sophisticated art - that is,
And even though a lot of people like
art with highly complex patterns -if the patterns become too
complex to the point that thethe pattern is not overly
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
complex, but just alien. Forused to it and so
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
hearing something that to
does not detect the patterns immediately.
The patterns are too
complex to be picked out immediately when
them isbe recognized as music, but
unusual.
An alien music that is simple might
add complexity to it being alien andit will be heard as noise
while the person who is used to itand has it imprinted on him or
her will clearly hear music andschool and I read lots of books.
enjoyable music too.
On 1/1/2016 12:43 PM, Miriam Vieni
wrote:
I have attended college and graduate
I'vein particular, to Italy twice.
visited museums and been to europe,
And i don't have a clue about whatart truly is. I know what
music I enjoy hearing and what musicI don't like and what I like
includes folk, country, popularbut I did like impressionist
songs from the days before rock
and roll, and some classical music.
My appreciation of the visual
arts was hampered by poor vision,
paintings, and paintings that tendedtoward being representational.
On some of the trips arrange forand explanations of art by
blind people in which I
participated, I was subjected to art
specialists in various museums, andI always felt like the
specialists were being patronizingand I was being stupid. I've
read a number of novels which dealtwith the experience of
artists, particularly contemporaryartists and the ways in which
they express themselves in variousart forms. I haven't been able
to truly relate to most of what I'veread. I'm aware that what
artists do is related to, andinforms their sensibilities.
influenced by the societyies in
which they live and the culture that
And I know that some governmentswho were professional
have used art as propaganda.
Also, many years ago, I had friends
classical musicians. Some of theirfriends made a steady living
as music teachers in public schoolsand they played in orchestras
at concerts when they were able toget this work. My friends did
not have steady teaching jobs. Theymight teach at a community
college for a semester or at a musicschool, but making a living
involved a constant scramble forbut I don't think I ever
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,
heard a discussion of music per se.level as I am in terms of
I assume that most of us on
this list are somewhere at the same
understanding true art or what makesan artist.
AM
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
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'Art is incompatible with
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] [blind-democracy]
lies, hypocrisy and conformity'Probably I haven't much of a
Good New Years Day Alice and All,
grasp on anything. Take my theoriesregarding the Creation of
God, or my grasp on the need to havea one people, one people's
government and a united respect forall life, World.
No grasp on any of those topics, andmany other crazy notions I
conjure up.grasp on this blind
But then I also don't have much of a
democracy list, either. I figuredwe might simply toss out ideas
and explore our thinking, ratheris straight off the top of my
than make character judgements.
Most of what I put out on this list
nor do I expect you all to do
mind.
I don't often research my opinions,
individuals. Some folks are
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
far more creative and talented thanothers. Still, even the most
creative are influenced by the worldaround them. In some
cultures artof this nation. But Madison
is encouraged.
This was the case in the early days
Avenue, an Oligarchy form ofmeasure of success, and much
government, a Corporate Empire,
pressure to seek financial gain as a
more have warped what we consider tobe Art, or Creative Talent.
Indeed, we are far closer to theGreece.
Roman Empire in our creative
talents, than to the Glory Days of
So is this what was bothering you,Alice? If so, then I stand on
my statement.straight privately, or tell
By the way, anyone wanting to set me
me to shut up, can do so privately.bacon and egg and toast with
I am at:
carjar82@xxxxxxxxx
Carl Jarvis, who is heading for a
jam breakfast. First one of the newyear. Hopefully not the last.
good grasp on artistic
On 12/31/15, Alice Dampman Humel
<alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I'm afraid you do not have a very
sensibilities, personalities,stifled. alice On Dec 31,
expressions, lives, etc.
No artist worth his/her salt will be
2015, at 11:12 AM, Carl Jarvispure art would look like in a
<carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is hard for me to imagine what
Land that is so controlled that theMasters corrupt artistic
expression, or stifle it altogether.tolerated by the Empire.
Freedom of expression is not to be
the Books of the Month for
Carl Jarvis
On 12/31/15, Roger Loran Bailey
<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
then its defender against
December.
From the vantage point of a
leader in the early Soviet
republic along with V.I. Lenin, and
the political counterrevolutionfor, Trotsky examines the
after Lenin died led by Joseph
Stalin and the bureaucracy he spoke
place of art and artistic creationin building a new,
socialist1929, Trotsky got asylum in
society.
Expelled from the Soviet Union in
1936 in Mexico with the aid of DiegoRivera, the country's
leading artist. The excerpt is from"Art and Politics in Our
Epoch," originally published as aletter to the August
1938 Partisan Review, a politicaland cultural magazine
published in the U.S. Copyright C1970 by Pathfinder Press.
Reprinted by permission.it was able to control
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,
and assimilate every "rebel"said and done, the
movement in art and raise it to
the level of official "recognition."
But each time this
"recognition" betokened, when all is
approach of trouble. It was thena fresher revolt would
that from the left wing of
the academic school or below it -
i.e., from the ranks of a
new generation of bohemian artists -
surge up to attain in its turn,"democratic." This was a
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
question of not only giving freehowever little, to our
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,
epoch. It fears superstitiouslyof absolute monarchies
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
was based on idealization but not onfalsification. The
official art of the Soviet Union -a heroic myth. Human
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
history has never seen anything tohas evidently been
equal this in scope and
impudence. .
The style of present-day official
Soviet painting is called
"socialist realism." The name itself
invented by some high functionary inthe department of the
arts. Thisin the manner of
"realism"
consists in the imitation of
provincial daguerreotypes of the
third quarter of the last century;
the "socialist" character
apparently consists in representing,
pretentious photography, eventsprose without physical
which never took place. It is
impossible to read Soviet verse and
disgust, mixed with horror, or toperiod will remain as the
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
frankest expression of the profounddecline of the proletarian
is the greatest element of
revolution. .
The real crisis of civilization is
above all the crisis of
revolutionary leadership. Stalinism
reaction in this crisis. Without aof "leading" and even
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
less of commanding art, eitherenter the head of a
before or after the conquest of
power. Such a pretension could only
bureaucracy - ignorant and impudent,intoxicated with its
totalitarian power - which hasown approach and methods,
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
if the struggle for freedom ofdomination of the Kremlin
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
Text-version home
bureaucracy.
Front page (for this issue) | Home |
