I now admit this to you, one and all:
I actually really enjoy abstract expressionism. I know it was literally a CIA op, I know. and I care, I just... I still like it. it's pretty and effusive without and indirect, all allusion and no specific definite invocation of any particular ideam while basking in all the possibilities of things it could be and being entirely deniable. it warms my deeply postmodern cognitive organs.
which way to the gulag?
Sorry comrade, you're only allowed to enjoy socialist realism and some older landscapes that have peasants toiling in them.
I enjoy some of those too, it just... I.... I'm so sorry. I blame my culture of origin.
I am legit ashamed of this tho.
Wait, are you seriously feeling bad about this? I thought it was a bit
just because its true and sad and fucked up doesn't mean it isn't funny as hell and/or a bit. have you see the past fifty years of history?
because fuck you is why and also you don't um... you aren't entitled to work a home food clean water clean air or literally anything else you need to survive, the law is only there to prevent you from being literally killed. possibly by depriving your brain of oxygen or your lungs of air.
look, it's different, alright? jeeze.
Art has always been emblematic of the dominant ideology and used to accommodate it or used by it. Rembrandt's portraits of Dutch merchants are purposely there to show the stark extraction of wealth done by those villains under mercantilism as stern, pious and austere.
Likewise American art from the 20th century tends to be pushing the notion of liberalism. Much of Andy Warhol's works were supposed to be a celebration of industrially made imagery and products. He said he liked coca cola and Campbell's soup because their consumption broke through old class divisions. Keith Haring also pushed art towards commercialisation and consumerism which reflected the late 20th century's economy away from industry.
Of course it's not limited to visual arts but you get the picture. (Sorry about the pun) Don't worry about liking artwork especially at the level of genre. It all has an element and context that makes our viewing complex ethically.Much of Andy Warhol’s works were supposed to be a celebration of industrially made imagery and products.
(Valerie Solanas's sublimated rage at the soulless world created by boring liberal men intensifies)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto
I don't support sentences that need to be read more than once to understand
most sentences don't understand no matter how many times they're read.
Idk much about this tbh but I say like a lot of things under capitalism it's important to take things and make them ours. As for the CIA part I say they one part supporting capitalism and imperialism one part most likely a huge money grift pit. If not this style then they would have financed something else.
Enjoy it or hell try painting some. I think it's important not to give up on something just because capitalism weaponized it, just being mindful as you are of it's history helps though. Realizing telling someone to just paint one seems naive on my end since I'm not versed in any art.
Looking at pieces of this I like how interpretive it is. I feel like I'm getting inside the artist head space. Also very Rorschach like. Thanks for finally describing this type of art and pointing out the CIA connection, very cool.
on the topic of DOING art, all I know is this: it's very difficult, and very expensive, and exactly how to describe whatever I'm failing to do.
Yeah, I have a sister who likes acrylic painting but uses stuff like canvases, brushes, paints, tape, some white stuff called I think gesepo, and other things I'm barely aware of. It's expansive and time consuming but it seems to make her happy.
Thought with how passionate you seemed about abstract expressionism maybe you'd want to try it. Admittedly you probably already thought of this and have your reasons why you didn't but if it's for expenses or difficulty well I think back to my sister.
She barely has any money and doesn't sell her art but still does it. It also takes her like a couple of months of her free time to complete one but likes the results even if I see her getting close to losing it some days.
It's a tall order yes, and not being funded by the cia I can see makes it harder, but felt like it would be good to encourage a comrade in making some soul stirring art. Don't remember the quote but you know "bread and roses". If you do or don't I wish you good luck comrade.
i tend to do poetry rather than painting. its cheaper more satisfying to me, and doesn't require my shitty imprecise fingers.
From the way you described the art the other day you do seem to have a way with words. I know I looked up some pieces on the google. I know it's not the same as in person but was fun. Don't ask me what the pieces where called though because I don't remember the names just how I felt staring at them.
it was literally done to make communists look stodgy and uncool. by the defenders of capitalism.
Allriiiiight I didn't know about the AE - CIA link, but it's totally stupid for fuck sakes who ever cared about those stupid paintings except rich snobs.
Except for you, you are cool :af-heart:
what about the people who made them? and the poor underpaid CIA assets, some of whom were sex workers and drug dealers and just good people doing (unironically) good honest work that served the interests of monsters?
But I really don't understand how Abstract Expressionism served anyone interests, like, really what did all that operation acchieve? Popularizing an art form? so what?
making the USSR look stodgy and old fashioned and unfashionable-remember, communism used to be hot and hip and shit. I don't know how effective it was, but the soviets were (rightly) like "okay but WTF is this" (because the CIA had bought up the world's supply of acid so the soviets didn't have the necessary "sophistication" to see it) and kept painting things that were actually good and spoke to, like, life and shit and actual experiences. I don't know how effective/useful it was, and I don't think the CIA does either, but it happened.
the CIA had bought up the world’s supply of acid
There was a large supply for psychological research at Dr. Stanislav Groff's lab in the CSSR, leading socialist investigation on the use of psychedelics. The Sandoz works in Switzerland where still producing LSD as well and selling it to everyone interested, as it was entirely unregulated in the late 1950s/early 1960s. Yes, the CIA actually did make such big orders that Sandoz struggled to produce much for anyone else, but it's not as if all the acid went to the CIA.
Within the US, the CIA was not the only government agency storing acid either, the army had a whole barrel of the stuff at Edgewood Arsenal for their own experiments. I assume similar things can be said about the British armed forces, who verifiably did test LSD as a chemical warfare agent at the time, but i have never found any information about how much exactly they ordered and put into storage.
im aware that sandoz was still producing and the CIA didn't have a monopoly. didn't know about the CSSR stockpile or the US army stash. yay, information!
I was just saying that the CIA were just completely batshit nutjobs and pointing out that communists of the day were, you know; less absurd.
Anyways, it was a phenomenal grift, o7 to them for deviating money that could have used for evil purposes elsewhere
I thought I liked abstract expressionism, then I realized that I actually just liked constructivism.
there's wonderful art in every school!
*there's wonderful art in almost every school!
okay but im not posting about the art of it. im posting about deserving a gulag for a problematic thing.
fuck im too much of an anarchist to figure out a proper gulag. has somebody already got one built somewhere? how do we handle that? and the double gulaging? how does that work?
