Permanently Deleted

  • happybadger [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    I'm trying to get r/modernart off the ground for that reason. Modernism, 1870s-1940s~ in particular, has a lot for socialists and almost nothing for reactionaries (short of surrealism and futurism). Marxist art criticism is deeply rooted in superstructure and critical theory more broadly so there's a lot to engage with. Shitting on bourgeois patrons and academics is a central feature of the period so it's art you can bully people with.

    • TreadOnMe [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Short of surrealism and futurism

      Which is incredibly unfortunate because those two things are my favorite forms of art.

      • HamManBad [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Finding out Salvador Dali was a Francoist :deeper-sadness:

      • happybadger [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I wish both had better communities. Surrealism fails because it's just empty metaphors/ironic imagery/distorted perspective, like the modernism equivalent of Rick and Morty with all the same appeal to people whose sense of appreciation is somewhere between "holds up spork" and "I recognise the holds up spork reference!". Futurism is little big man syndrome for entire agrarian societies. It's the modern art equivalent of a car magazine with all the same appeal to chuds who equate their masculinity with driving really fast. I've started a few surrealist communities, r/fifthworldproblems and r/sixthworldproblems, which I more or less abandoned within a couple years because they're insect lamps for Nazis. Any other movement is going to require historical perspective or extra dimensions of systems thinking or femininity that they're incapable of.

        Both could be rehabilitated into a left-radical lens but they'll always come up against that messaging wall. Futurism as train worship and solarpunk, surrealism as Tim Heidecker's more absurdist take.