I've seen lots of postmodern art that I just do not comprehend or even particularly aesthetically enjoyed with the artist's commentary to explain their thought process. (Specifically thinking about the postmodern art exhibition of hyperrealistic but distorted or mutilated dicks of varying sizes I saw at NY's MOMA. There were more genital giblets there than you'd see in a public pool locker room.) Yet I can appreciate the passion and free-flowing process of creation, or the lack thereof - depending on the artist's intent - that each piece has put into them.
Reactionaries fetishization of "traditional" art is an obsession over a utopianist ideal vision of the past those artworks portrayed. They look and understand that the modern world is filled with contradictions, whether they comprehend the conditions that create them or most likely not, that fill them with revulsion to look away for a world that appears flawless and shining. They don't like, appreciate, or understand art from any period, they only like the belief they ascribe to it.
The really weird stuff like Duchamps urinal was a reaction to the then contemporary art world and world at large that we live in the looooong shadow of (also the post-modernist stuff chuds rail about was all CIA funded lol, they would've loved Soviet era worker realism). People wanting more realism now is defintely in reaction to the ever growing disconnection between art and life or anything even aesthetically pleasing, so to some extent its pretty normal.
I, for one, would love a series of paintings of those dope Chinese doctors that were riding horses through the snow to deliver medical help in Xinjiang. Like this one or this one. Or just a series of portraits of just... regular people doing their regular people things like having coffee or working or playing video games. I'm kind of sick of everything being disintegrated into dick giblets to stand for "the patriarchy" or whatever, something more subtle as well as more reflective of modern life would be nice too.
I don't think the dick giblets were a feminist statement if I recall, but some kind of social commentary on the human condition and the warped perception of our own bodies vs. idealized visions imposed on us by consumer culture.
There's pretty compelling evidence that Duchamp claimed the credit for La Fontaine from one of his contemporaries (Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven) fwiw, a lot of the Art World(tm) gets very mad when you bring it up. I have really mixed feelings about Dada as a whole, I think its central thesis about "the world doesn't make sense, why should art make sense" really resonates in the present day — zoomer humor has big Dadaist vibes.
Part of the problem is that what constitutes Art(tm) is by-and-large decided by the elite
lots of postmodern art that I just do not comprehend or even particularly aesthetically enjoyed
tbf some (a lot of) art really does suck ass.
not because its postmodern or traditional or whatever other genre, but because its just incredibly poorly done or otherwise objectionable due to the message behind it.
they only like the belief they ascribe to it
probably the main reason, aside from past-fetishization, that they dislike art that isnt 'realistic,' tbh
its a lot harder to ascribe a belief to something when you have to create an interpretation of an amorphous blob or whatever that fits that view, where "i only like pictures of pretty white people" is very easy
The wildest thing about the reactionary hatred of postmodern art and postmodernism in general is that they were literally a reactionary psyop to try to displace modernism and replace political art with literal nonsense. Like postmodern artists literally got CIA funding and promotion through front companies to serve as a meaningless and vapid counterpart to socialist realism.
Like postmodern artists literally got CIA funding and promotion through front companies to serve as a meaningless and vapid counterpart to socialist realism.
do you have any sources/reading on this? would love to check it out if you have
I'm trying to track down the one thing I remember clear enough details of to search for directly: the history of "show, don't tell" being taught as gospel to writers in college which literally came about through CIA funded think tanks as a means of eliminating political writing in popular media, but I can't find the article that was linked here a few months ago and google turns up a mountain of unrelated things that I'm too tired to sort through. My memory of postmodern art and CIA funding is even vaguer, I just know it was promoted both formally and informally as "western culture" to compete with the socialist realism promoted by the USSR.
Making a post specifically asking for reading on the topic would probably get more attention from people who keep a better record of that sort of thing than I do, since I never remember to bookmark and catalogue stuff like that.
deleted by creator
It means that he has the vague hate of postmodern art that a lot of reactionaries have.
I've seen lots of postmodern art that I just do not comprehend or even particularly aesthetically enjoyed with the artist's commentary to explain their thought process. (Specifically thinking about the postmodern art exhibition of hyperrealistic but distorted or mutilated dicks of varying sizes I saw at NY's MOMA. There were more genital giblets there than you'd see in a public pool locker room.) Yet I can appreciate the passion and free-flowing process of creation, or the lack thereof - depending on the artist's intent - that each piece has put into them.
Reactionaries fetishization of "traditional" art is an obsession over a utopianist ideal vision of the past those artworks portrayed. They look and understand that the modern world is filled with contradictions, whether they comprehend the conditions that create them or most likely not, that fill them with revulsion to look away for a world that appears flawless and shining. They don't like, appreciate, or understand art from any period, they only like the belief they ascribe to it.
The really weird stuff like Duchamps urinal was a reaction to the then contemporary art world and world at large that we live in the looooong shadow of (also the post-modernist stuff chuds rail about was all CIA funded lol, they would've loved Soviet era worker realism). People wanting more realism now is defintely in reaction to the ever growing disconnection between art and life or anything even aesthetically pleasing, so to some extent its pretty normal.
I, for one, would love a series of paintings of those dope Chinese doctors that were riding horses through the snow to deliver medical help in Xinjiang. Like this one or this one. Or just a series of portraits of just... regular people doing their regular people things like having coffee or working or playing video games. I'm kind of sick of everything being disintegrated into dick giblets to stand for "the patriarchy" or whatever, something more subtle as well as more reflective of modern life would be nice too.
I don't think the dick giblets were a feminist statement if I recall, but some kind of social commentary on the human condition and the warped perception of our own bodies vs. idealized visions imposed on us by consumer culture.
Or dude just wanted to make dick sculptures lmaoo
There's pretty compelling evidence that Duchamp claimed the credit for La Fontaine from one of his contemporaries (Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven) fwiw, a lot of the Art World(tm) gets very mad when you bring it up. I have really mixed feelings about Dada as a whole, I think its central thesis about "the world doesn't make sense, why should art make sense" really resonates in the present day — zoomer humor has big Dadaist vibes.
Part of the problem is that what constitutes Art(tm) is by-and-large decided by the elite
tbf some (a lot of) art really does suck ass.
not because its postmodern or traditional or whatever other genre, but because its just incredibly poorly done or otherwise objectionable due to the message behind it.
probably the main reason, aside from past-fetishization, that they dislike art that isnt 'realistic,' tbh
its a lot harder to ascribe a belief to something when you have to create an interpretation of an amorphous blob or whatever that fits that view, where "i only like pictures of pretty white people" is very easy
The wildest thing about the reactionary hatred of postmodern art and postmodernism in general is that they were literally a reactionary psyop to try to displace modernism and replace political art with literal nonsense. Like postmodern artists literally got CIA funding and promotion through front companies to serve as a meaningless and vapid counterpart to socialist realism.
do you have any sources/reading on this? would love to check it out if you have
I'm trying to track down the one thing I remember clear enough details of to search for directly: the history of "show, don't tell" being taught as gospel to writers in college which literally came about through CIA funded think tanks as a means of eliminating political writing in popular media, but I can't find the article that was linked here a few months ago and google turns up a mountain of unrelated things that I'm too tired to sort through. My memory of postmodern art and CIA funding is even vaguer, I just know it was promoted both formally and informally as "western culture" to compete with the socialist realism promoted by the USSR.
Making a post specifically asking for reading on the topic would probably get more attention from people who keep a better record of that sort of thing than I do, since I never remember to bookmark and catalogue stuff like that.
i don't think he's reactionary, i think he's just boring
I'm imagining that he saw a post at some point complaining about a giant red canvas and decided that he hated art without further reflection.
"so i'm basically stupid as shit, and this really touched me"