Reconciling politics and taste

Dominic Diaz
Dominic Diaz

What happened to beauty?
Now I'm not an impotent reactionary mindlessly moaning against everything about the present. In fact, I quite like today.

But with all our progress in science and technology and human rights, I feel like we've completely abandoned beauty.

What happened to gorgeous paintings? Marble sculptors of glorious people? Why is modern architecture so absolutely fucking hideous? Why is philosophy today utterly retarded?

I don't know how I can rationalise my left leanings with my preference for the aesthetics of the past, when socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music.
Maybe socialism needs another Arts & Crafts Movement.

Anyone got any suggestions for me? Are there any Classicist Commies? Romanticist Reds?
Books for this feel?

Attached: cq5dam.web.1280.1280.jpeg (250.03 KB, 981x734)

Other urls found in this thread:

independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html).

Liam Myers
Liam Myers

when socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music.

Attached: adorno-2.jpg (47.6 KB, 542x441)

Brayden Russell
Brayden Russell

when socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music.

Attached: 070.jpg (44.22 KB, 730x780)

Connor Young
Connor Young

I went to Catholic school where I was fed very reactionary ideology. However, one thing I miss was the emphasis on the high arts and philosophy, which the modern left has outright dismissed. And let's face it: a lot of leftist art just isn't that compelling. There's no sense of "epic" like you see in the classical arts, it's all really preachy slam poetry, ugly-ass art that's supposed to be ugly and depressing on purpose, you get the idea. Plus, I feel as if when it comes to philosophy the far-left just doesn't explore most concepts as they see them as too "bourgeois" or whatever, which is sad because metaphysics is an important thing to discuss.

Dominic Thomas
Dominic Thomas

My fucking god. There isn't even a socialist movement, and you're blaming the hidious art of capitalism on socialism, and wanting an "arts movement" within a movement that doesn't exist.
Once we get state power we can have this discussion.
Rude sage.

Cameron Taylor
Cameron Taylor

when socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music
very much like pic related, what the fuck?

Attached: 1493867109872.png (468.16 KB, 1280x586)

Christopher Robinson
Christopher Robinson

There are a lot of good technical artists out there, but realism is boring and most people would rather draw animu or furshit. The amount of good music getting pumped out is insane, but most of it isn't getting picked up by labels. I think you are being too negative. If you don't like what art is getting made then you should make your own.

Matthew Harris
Matthew Harris

Yeah, I mean the reason why we rarely see grand realist paintings anymore should be pretty obvious, a photographer can go out and take a crisp and clear shot of anything that really exists, and even for historical stuff he's more likely to dress actors up and make a TV show out of it. The reason why art has become more about fantasy and unreality should be obvious.

Attached: battlestar-galactica-last-supper.jpg (157.41 KB, 1879x719)

Chase Roberts
Chase Roberts

Capitalism commodities everything. Once the best of society were the only ones able to effect the arts and as a result we had great art.
Now that the masses can vote with their wallets i.e. music for 99cents a song art has conformed to the will of the masses which is shit

Attached: IMG-20181116-211750.jpg (298.28 KB, 1280x935)

Isaac Walker
Isaac Walker

Capitalism commodities everything.

Agreed

Once the best of society were the only ones able to effect the arts and as a result we had great art.
Now that the masses can vote with their wallets i.e. music for 99cents a song art has conformed to the will of the masses which is shit

The fuck is this take?

Attached: 1468759090918.png (196.32 KB, 426x441)

Jose Wright
Jose Wright

Support the Modernism of the nineteenth century that created Marx.
Most “socialists” in the west are postmodernists which is responsible for artistic stagnation/regression.
I’d fuck Nico and Rin though
Still why is it that painters a century ago were better at unreality than those today? Also all Marxists should support artistic realism due to Marxism being a realist ideology. We as Marxists look at the world as how it is, not how we want to see it. This is what separates us from liberals and the far-right. For they strive towards the real, while we strive towards the logical resolutions to the contradictions present in todays society.
Fuck off with this elitist bullshit. Part of why paintings are so trash today is that their used for money laundering.

Attached: Gino-Severini-Lancers.jpg (97.67 KB, 781x600)

Thomas Wilson
Thomas Wilson

I realise I may have came off too aggressive with that point.
I'm just really sad and annoyed that when I walk about my ancient and noble English town, trying to ignore the filth and litter lining the pavements, and I can't help but be forced to notice the grim, gray waterstained depressing council estates with their crime, and this cityscape being raped by affronts to taste, it can in many cases be blamed on the left.
It's talentless leftist architects with who design it. It's loathesome wealthy champagne socialists who fund it. It's smug leftist critics who sniff their own farts that defend it and look down upon the common people who hate it.

Attached: blob-1024x646.jpg (232.2 KB, 1024x646)

Ayden Anderson
Ayden Anderson

And let's face it: a lot of leftist art just isn't that compelling.
There's no sense of "epic" like you see in the classical arts, it's all really preachy slam poetry, ugly-ass art

Attached: motherland.jpg (206.1 KB, 1200x801)
Attached: dd81f8c621fe4826c723872dfe3748b0c2abfcf1c3154a6b253744ccd4a1e8f2.png (246.47 KB, 560x560)
Attached: Worker-and-Kolkhoz-Woman-Museum-moscow.jpg (917.9 KB, 1650x1068)
Attached: IMG-1570.JPG (310.32 KB, 1600x1200)

Adrian Sanders
Adrian Sanders

The fuck is this take?
i don't see what you're confused about

James Thomas
James Thomas

Fuck off with this elitist bullshit. Part of why paintings are so trash today is that their used for money laundering.
do you have anything else but butthurt?
The aristocracy are not involved in drug dealing so you just help my point

Hudson Gutierrez
Hudson Gutierrez

It's elitist and borderline fascist, the point of socialism is not to go back to the good old days when the patriarchs and monarchs controlled what art got made.

Owen Carter
Owen Carter

waterstained depressing council estates with their crime, and this cityscape being raped by affronts to taste, it can in many cases be blamed on the left.
It's talentless leftist architects with who design it. It's loathesome wealthy champagne socialists who fund it. It's smug leftist critics who sniff their own farts that defend it and look down upon the common people who hate it.
Fucking source?

Benjamin Rogers
Benjamin Rogers

He's getting confused between leftists and liberals. Plus ignoring the fact that council estates were a huge step forward for the British poor, if you don't like tower blocks I hope to go you never see the kind of prewar slums that existed and may exist again once they're torn down.

Michael Hernandez
Michael Hernandez

It's elitist and borderline fascist
<literally everything that hurts my feelings is fascist
ok come on

the point of socialism is not to go back to the good old days when the patriarchs and monarchs controlled what art got made.
ok? what does this have to do with what I said?
Art under socialism would probably be more elitist as it would no longer be commodified

John Watson
John Watson

ok come on

"Back in the olden days when only the 'best' (ie hereditary nobility) were in charge things were better" sounds like fascist tradition worship, sorry bro.

Art under socialism would probably be more elitist as it would no longer be commodified

So it's bad that people get to consume art they enjoy? I agree that without the completely base impulse of profit culture would flourish but not by closing it off completely to the wishes of the masses. Art should inspire the masses not be masturbated over by pretentious wankers.

Landon Hernandez
Landon Hernandez

"Back in the olden days when only the 'best' (ie hereditary nobility) were in charge things were better" sounds like fascist tradition worship, sorry bro.

Yeah you strawmanned me and twisted my words because i hurt your feelings

So it's bad that people get to consume art they enjoy?
It is bad that capitalism has commidified culture
I agree that without the completely base impulse of profit culture would flourish but not by closing it off completely to the wishes of the masses. Art should inspire the masses not be masturbated over by pretentious wankers

The pretentious is a result of art being accessible to the middle class and upper middle class i.e. high paid proletariat

Isaac Brooks
Isaac Brooks

Yeah you strawmanned me and twisted my words because i hurt your feelings

I mean yeah, that isn't exactly what you said, but it's what you implied, when exactly was art a meritocracy? I'm pretty sure in High Medieval Europe the monarchs weren't going around the pig farms looking for great painters among the peasantry.

The pretentious is a result of art being accessible to the middle class and upper middle class i.e. high paid proletariat

Actually I meant you.

Andrew Evans
Andrew Evans

*Taps Glass*
*Clears Throat*
FUCK PRETENTIOUS LIBERAL ARCHITECTURE
FUCK YOUR INAUTHENTIC ANTIQUATED POSTURING
FUCK YOUR NOSTALGIC MIMICRY
FUCK ALL OF YOUR "FEELINGS" IN GENERAL
THIS IS NOW AN ARCHITECTURE AND CITY PLANNING THREAD

Attached: le-corbusier-urbanisme-cartesian-towers.jpg (942.62 KB, 2023x1476)
Attached: 8da2e93897fc12a6c1dc1df337206750d3557eb940d19b2f5edf76670d4a1148.jpeg (3.89 MB, 2328x3596)
Attached: malevich-kazimir-suprematism-cataloguecollection.jpg (37.27 KB, 641x589)
Attached: totems-without-qualities-o.jpg (316.88 KB, 1200x744)

Cameron Baker
Cameron Baker

I mean yeah, that isn't exactly what you said, but it's what you implied, when exactly was art a meritocracy?
when it wasn't commodified

I'm pretty sure in High Medieval Europe the monarchs weren't going around the pig farms looking for great painters among the peasantry
what does that have to do with art

Tyler Bailey
Tyler Bailey

What I'm saying is that only massively privileged and wealthy by birth people could ever devote their time to art rather than digging crops, art wasn't limited to 'the best' but only the people who ever got to try it in the first place.

Luis Bailey
Luis Bailey

, but realism is boring and most people would rather draw animu or furshit.
hot take: leftypol really should embrace furries given how heavily left-leaning the entire community is and how anti-reactionary the very concept of anthropormorphized animals is.

Bentley James
Bentley James

Being an oldfag I hate to say this, but furries are okay. They are haven't been on my list of annoyances for more than a decade and as long as they continue to keep to themselves I don't give a shit. I still won't "embrace" them or whatever. Our focus aren't subcultures, but rather an entire class and maybe some of the sympathizers outside of it.

Christian Sullivan
Christian Sullivan

I still won't "embrace" them or whatever. Our focus aren't subcultures, but rather an entire class and maybe some of the sympathizers outside of it.
Fair enough, I suppose it would be better to say that we should bring them into the fold. Lotta furries are poor and unhappy and would readily jump to socialism if we offered them FALC species-changing genetic modification

Logan Jenkins
Logan Jenkins

Revolutionary art is as epic as it gets. When it comes to philosophy socialism goes much broader and deeper than reaction. Weak strawman tbh.

Imagine being this deep in bourgeois ideology that you openly acknowledge them as aristocrats but insist they can do no wrong. Frat bros sniff coke. The CIA harvests Afghanian poppy fields. Drug lords are bourgeois.

Le Corbusier
highways
user… atleast post good transit-oriented city planning

That pic is hilarious to me because the city on the left looks like it has more density and public transit because communists and social democrats in the 20th century fought for that. See Red Vienna. It's unironically more like what socialist urban planning should be than the block on the right.

kys

Attached: commie-pepe.png (52.53 KB, 616x596)

Luke Clark
Luke Clark

I have zero issue with furry socialists, but I won't make an effort dealing with them. We should focus on the issues impacting people in general like shit wages, no healthcare, overpriced food, overpriced rent, and generally shitty services from our current government. Furries, weebs, and all the other internet subcultures will fall in line when they see only the left will meet their actual needs.

Eli Green
Eli Green

However, one thing I miss was the emphasis on the high arts and philosophy, which the modern left has outright dismissed.
Ah yes. Of course! That's why universities are known for their very right-wing philosophy and fine arts departments. Leftists have absolutely no interest in those fields of study.
You're talking out of your ass.

Sebastian Bell
Sebastian Bell

socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music
<I'm not an impotent reactionary

Ayden Ross
Ayden Ross

What I'm saying is that only massively privileged and wealthy by birth people could ever devote their time to art rather than digging crops, art wasn't limited to 'the best' but only the people who ever got to try it in the first place.
Ok but people digging up crops wouldn't be good artists anyways

Landon Roberts
Landon Roberts

Imagine being this deep in bourgeois ideology that you openly acknowledge them as aristocrats but insist they can do no wrong. Frat bros sniff coke. The CIA harvests Afghanian poppy fields. Drug lords are bourgeois.

literally irrelevant to the conversation

Joshua Wright
Joshua Wright

That pic is hilarious to me because the city on the left looks like it has more density and public transit because communists and social democrats in the 20th century fought for that. See Red Vienna. It's unironically more like what socialist urban planning should be than the block on the right.

city on the left is better

Jackson Cook
Jackson Cook

Capitalist US government directly funds abstract expressionism in opposition to more traditional Communist art.
socialism is so clearly responsible in many ways for the grim state of our cities and art and music.

Ryder Hall
Ryder Hall

Money Laundering only takes place when it's involved with Drug Trafficking
LOL, ok, you realise the majority of money laundering is to avoid taxes & disguise embezzlement/shady deals as opposed to direct profits from organized crime right?

Sebastian Walker
Sebastian Walker

Are you mentally ill or just baiting now?

Hudson Bell
Hudson Bell

I'm not a reactionary but [reactionary rant]
Kill yourself.

Elijah Parker
Elijah Parker

Post more art to btfo OP

Attached: Odd-Nerdrum-Mordet-pa-Andreas-Baader.png (116 KB, 280x356)

Kayden Bennett
Kayden Bennett

Brutalism is best architecture. prove me wrong. protip: you can't.

Jeremiah Sanders
Jeremiah Sanders

It's unironically based and subversive.

People who consider that only naked Greek men and old ass medieval castles are art usually are the ones who know the least about art.

Owen Collins
Owen Collins

Attached: 2c1296deff353127957f250b016f28da48c358eb7e5ab2905621696663e143cb.jpg (125.45 KB, 736x1051)
Attached: IMG-20190320-063705.jpg (146.11 KB, 960x720)

Anthony Perry
Anthony Perry

As a visitor from /monarchy/, let me opine with some reactionary takes on materialism.

Now I'm the first one to disbelieve, and scoff at the notion that dialectical materialism necessarily results in communism. Evolution does not have a goal, and the same is true of markets and economies; they are aimless beasts on the landscape, competing for survival.

But I think I know why art used to be good, and is now bad; it's all about the economics. Or put another way, excessive wealth leads to excess/unessential and often disposable crap. This extends beyond the plastic garbage gyre in the Pacific Ocean made of your shitty plastic water bottles, and extends even so far as buildings. Skyscrapers are a good example; a building that has no alternative uses other than being office space or apartments. Or take the strip mall; it could have been designed as a plaza, and hence would be useful later for non-retail oriented small businesses, but instead it was designed to be torn down wastefully in the event that it needed to be repurposed.

In short, throwaway culture (the thing that actually happened to beauty) is itself a feature of unrestrained capitalism. That's not to say I approve of communism, but facts are facts.

And no amount of supposedly leftist faggots creating eco-homosexuality positive buildings, some of which will fall down due to the erroneous idea that structural supports are toxic masculinity architecturalized, are going to change the fact that the ugliness is only made possible by rampant capitalistic exploitation and narcissism.

Be an authoritarian for good reasons instead; like the fact that freedom is overrated/mostly a political talking point for America and her allies.

Attached: The-Market-of-Our-Democracy-Ilya-Glazunov.jpeg (512.36 KB, 1437x760)

Logan Cruz
Logan Cruz

and?

Noah Young
Noah Young

Now I'm the first one to disbelieve, and scoff at the notion that dialectical materialism necessarily results in communism. Evolution does not have a goal, and the same is true of markets and economies; they are aimless beasts on the landscape, competing for survival.
Evolution generally leads to a more perfect form of whatever it applies to over time: matter, species, economies, etc. Though the participants may not be intentionally promoting this end it occurs regardless. With economies, increasingly developed means of production, the base, command a new superstructure, such as the institutions and values of a time and place. The progression of material bases as it regards to these things is linear in history: first there was primitive communism, wherein labor and productive forces were collective, then came feudalism, with its accompanying social relations of lord and peasant and such, and now capitalism; with its newer relations that were compelled by mass industrialization and the accumulation of this new form of the means of production by capitalists, who became the ruling class. The technological advancement of a society, as evident through basically all of history, correlates with the evolution of social morality, norms, economic relations, and all such.

But I think I know why art used to be good, and is now bad; it's all about the economics
Yes, and in another way: as the US industrialized and began to come into its own, Americans desired to create art, however that was largely a European tradition and so in reaction they began producing their own domestic kind of art; "modern" art, which took off in the Cold War as a further reaction against socialist realism in the Eastern Bloc. With this, agencies like the CIA helped promote by creating shell companies and creating artificial demand for this kind of style (independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html). And of course, it's cheaper to have people value something inexpensive to produce than something that has more proper composition to it, which very usually takes more effort. This more so applies to buildings and such, where city planners and architects forego details and intricately-placed colors in favor of big blocky structures which give more profit margins.

Michael Hill
Michael Hill

Evolution generally leads to a more perfect form
Gonna stop you right there. Evolution doesn't care about perfection/there is no such thing as perfect, only reasonably efficient/not half-bad given the circumstances. Need I remind you that Giraffes exist? Yes that ugly fucking thing with the supersized neck. Or the koala, the only creature dumb enough to eat eucalyptus leaf as its sole form of nutrients. Sort of like how Venezuela decided that the only thing it would do is shit out oil for eternity. Both are headed for extinction.

technological advancement, historical dialectic, evolution of social morality
Let me fix that for you; massive amounts of wealth being generated by technological advancement, resulted for a 150 year time-frame in history, in a very real need to distribute those resources equitably. Socialism was just the attempt to go from equity to equality and hope nobody noticed. This resulted in an evolution (not better or worse mind you, just a change) in social morality. The second the free-flowing faucet of cash turns off, society will revert to the way it was evolving over the antecedent 18 centuries. Meaning that for a society that is not so rich, equity loses relevance. Think instead of how non-industrial and low-industrial societies manage themselves; hierarchy, authority, feudal relationships, and loyalty, these correspond to the material conditions of a society where money is expensive, so social life is lubricated by stark certainties and metaphysical realism because these generate the most trust, and trust lubricates an economy. Hence, such a nation is inherently monarchical; it seeks to have a good father for the nation, as in the household.

In short, we've had it too good. Anyway, not trying to go full /shtf/, it probably won't be too rapid a decline, more of a slow thing that will happen all our lives. However the migrant crises is a symptom; those people were supported by American Petro-Dollars to pick bananas for our tables. Now less of them are needed, so they are unemployed, with no opportunities, and their own governments don't have the welfare to help. Economics are dismal.

With this, agencies like the CIA helped promote by creating shell companies and creating artificial demand for this kind of style
Didn't know this, thanks

And of course, it's cheaper to have people value something inexpensive to produce than something that has more proper composition to it.
Life mirrors art doesn't it? We produce throwaway garbage, so our art is throwaway garbage.