In a communist society, what would be the incentive to create art...

In a communist society, what would be the incentive to create art? I understand that Capitalism makes shitty art but does communism create any?

Attached: 1461032960924.png (612x491, 97.59K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/IPpzWjnrAVE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Communism creates the best art. Look up Socialist Realism and compare it to the absolute crapfest that is modern art.

Wow it is pretty good, but what drove the artists to create such art?

I'm pretty sure most artists find making art fun or fulfilling.

And that can work when you're making a painting but what about making a movie for example? You need a lot of money for that.

Art is the domain of individualism and creativity working alone or collectively towards self-expression. In the past art was greatly restricted to only the fortunate few who were subsidised in their pursuit by the enslavement of others or to the fortunate few to be afforded patronage by those with great wealth and were thus able to create some manner of art. In capitalism art is subjected to the even crueler demands of the market whereby it must be servile to the petty whims of the masses, of consumers, and thus dies and there is little in the way of artists.
In Communism art will will be the domain of all people, all individuals will be free to pursue their artistic temperament if they so wish, in fact socialism may well render art the primary pursuit of man.
Read Oscar Wilde

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1475x479 31.69 KB, 66.46K)

Not really, you just need people willing to play parts in it, and a camera

tbqh, art in a full communist society would probably be dominated by video games, with movies, tv shows etc etc being very niche if made at all

Some Communist art.

Attached: 04271626a8787cdae94e1e5214627243de23784378bba1ebb539f3fc8fdb9d3d.jpg (736x1051 91.85 KB, 125.45K)

I really hate this types of threads. Normies are just to dumb to understand that artists, which includes inventors, engineers and scientists create art precisely because they are artists.

Attached: Tesla.png (500x630, 161.32K)

Afaik you could still be paid for art. And I'm not a communist, but I'm under the impression that part of the idea is that it gives working people more time and the profits of their labor - which means affording to make art would probably be easier.

But monetary incentive isn't really high up wrt art. Theoretically it could drive people towards mastering the finer classical styles (so they can do quality fetish commissions and kitsch paintings for Chinese restaurants), but I don't think money is the only thing which leads to people honing their techniques.

Art, and for that matter all labour is done for the feeling of accomplishment and self fufillment. That's how our brains work. Creating art doesn't need any incentive other than art itself.

When labour becomes not a prerequisite for life, but rather life's prime want, then the arts and sciences will merge with the productive spheres of society.

Because you like making art.
youtu.be/IPpzWjnrAVE

Attached: 1101420720_400.jpg (400x527, 34.91K)

Dude if you even have to ask this question you need to evaluate your life. How the fuck do you not feel the primal instinct to create and the souls crushing depression that comes with not being able to due to working 10 hours a day at a shitty retail job.

Attached: 1517374488.jpg (1080x1080, 172.71K)

What drives artists to make art under capitalism, even though they overwhelmingly will not make money from it, and merely fill the stereotype of the "starving artist"?

why would artists under communism need any incentive to create art other than their passion for creating? have you never been deeply inspired to write or draw something?
shitty art will always exist but capitalism monetizes and promotes it all over the place

Profit, same as now.

People will pay artists, guilds, or art collectives for their services.

Art?

sacrificing your food and electricity rations to buy art? hmm, might happen when there's no famine.

A gun to your head, art hoarding kulak.

The Soviet bloc had an all-but-complete monopoly on significant 20th century composers. There were restrictions placed on artists, sure, but it's not like restrictions weren't (and aren't still) placed on artists in the West. This idea that socialist states were places devoid of art is a stupid meme pushed by Western propagandists, in a similar vein to the idea that socialist states were perpetually in a state famine.

Attached: Dmitri Shostakovich - Waltz No. 2 (youtubemp4.to)

For starters, Prokofiev's Romeo and Juilet wasn't even played in Russia until 2 years after its composition because of the artistic repression launched during the great purge, with the most leading candidate of attacks being Shotakovich: after Stalin disliked his Lady MacBeth of Mvtensk (yeah the USSR was big into Shakespere at this point). So to claim that the restrictions under Stalin on arts weren't a big deal and the USSR had loads of great music (which it fucking did btw, y'all need to listen to "Time, Forward!" by Sidriov) by citing two blokes who had their art repressed and the latter offically denounced in Pravda (in an article supposedly by Stalin himself, but thought to be ghost written in actuality) is kinda ironic… Oh and, Shotakovich was only rehabilitated because he was seen as a Hero of the Seige of Leningrad (which he was btw, he was a firefighter during it).
Also the fuck you on the USSR had a monopoly on 20th century composers: Copland, Britten, Vaughn Williams, Holst, Phillip Glass. USSR had some great composers but miss me with that revisionist rubbish.

more like socialist absurdism lmao. i don't mean to diss lenin but it's just a ridiculous picture

This is real and multiple accounts of him doing that exist.

Attached: lenin-subbotnik.jpg (1225x912, 525.73K)

it's all boring kitsch you dumb fuck

People do art because they like it, not because they're paid for it.
Still now, 99% of art is made by people who don't even gain enough to survive well with their work, i always lived between teathre actors (with some of them being experts in agit&prop teather during and immediately after october's revolution) and most of them struggle every day to eat. Also directors which are not enough conformated with the mainstream taste never have the money to do stuff.
Under communism, art is much freer cause it has not to be submitted to the market, and the incredible amount of innovative music, teather stuff and films produced in USSR before Stalin's regulations kicked in kinda proves it.

Being alive?

That's like asking why anyone creates art at all– you do it because you're alive and want to express something. Only brainlets and ascended wunderkinds make art for financial incentive, pretty much everyone else does it because existence is boring without it, regardless of the economic system you live under.

T. illiterate retard who have never read Gorky or Sholokhov.

Yeah I think communism would certainly veer towards very personal visual novel-kind projects, at least with out current level of tech.

I imagine we'd set up a digital platform where people can choose to collectively sustain artists or projects that they find interesting. Some democratically determined part of our total social labor would be invested into these, and people would have the option to further invest a portion of their personal rations

Compared to the high modernism in the west, socialist realism is a throwback to the 19th century. There are good Soviet writers and poets, but most were banned for not conforming to socialist realism.

I imagine that communist art would be incredibly different from what we've seen before. Everything would belong to the commons, and with the proper attribution to the original creator, you could mix and match whatever content you'd want. The late-capitalist distinction between art and fan-art, base games and mods would have no reason to keep existing. Maybe this would eventually lead into the creation of enormous collective works. All kinds of different elements piling up, until they are eventually compiled into someone's personal conception of the whole. Maybe different creators would make their works interconnect in a decentralized manner. As a loosely connected team, or perhaps as small contributors to a huge interconnected world curated by a whole community.

It's hard to tell where it would eventually end up, but also very fun to theorize about.

Going by this fascism is good because their art is also good, similar to socialistic realism too.

High modernism for the highest 5%, dumbed down pop culture (created for profit before everything else) for the remaining 95%. Current state of modern art is only logical conclusion of it.
Any writer that got banned in the USSR immediately gained critical acclaim in the West as the "regime victim", while the actual talented writers remained (and remain) unknown. Do you know, for example, Маяковский, Есенин, Брюсов, Твардовский, Окуджава, Вознесенский, Рождественский? I wonder if you have actually read any Soviet writers or just regurgitating liberal consensus.

Art is something creative. People always did art and there is no incentive for it besides the fun of it. Capitalism doesn't provide incentitives for art, because artist need to make money with their art so they can live. In a communist society you wouldn't need to make money with your art because you don't need money. A communist society would be ideal for Art

This

In all my time on leftypol I have heard all invective against every leftist policy and seen the worst of every idealist, maniac, pacifist, utopian, and opportunist on this board

But this is the greatest indictment of communism I have seen yet, bravo

Somebody should delete these comments

The only things an artist needs to create are the means of the creation itself, so everything from the supplies required to the time he must dedicate to it, and something to inspire him, be it the tragedies of war, the wonders of a budding new society, or his own internal conflicts.

I see, but are there documents that say how long he actually toiled? sounds more like a photo op. anyway I mean to say the painting is shit and could have been executed better.

Because they're saying something you don't like would improve under Communism?

boredom and being tired of masturbating

These sorts of questions never fail to depress me, not because they're an indictment of Communism, but because they're emblematic of an emaciated spiritual husk that has never felt the urge or need to create anything of themselves in their entire life. It displays vividly the dead creature that Capitalism renders people into, the horrific alienation of people both from their inherent creative urge and even the ability to create. It's absolutely revolting.

Attached: marx in field tver.jpg (532x800, 135.46K)

More or less exactly this.