Earlier quoted context omitted.
The art of arbitrarily redefining existing terms will never die out.
This is a rich thing to say about the term "Modern", which is basically baked in with an expiration date.
Modern C++ means C++ from 2011 btw
Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
171–180 of 264 posts
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#172Incredible to believe the CIA has more sway over artistic movements than actual artists.
Wait til you find out what the GIA[1] did with other forms of cultural expression and education - like motion pictures, music, television, and academia [1]: Global Intelligence Agency - because we know that they have deep reach into every nation at this point and are only accountable to themselves.
Are you referring to the way they always have to portray the American army as the heroic winners of every war?
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#173Old news. Modern art is Antiart made to destroy European culture and replace it for the global debauchery of Americana. Harmful to the soul, void of talent, turning western civilization from master painters to banana + duct tape. EDIT: Saachi works similar to the way boy and girl bands are created. They are not artists, but underpaid unknowns whose works are packaged, productized, propped up, marketed and sold like K…
Van Gogh, Cezanne, and Picasso were Europeans, and Europe is where art speculation and the "Art Market" was born, and where Art History became equated with Art Market History. Americans showed up with a 20 year lag and kept lagging, with e.g. Pollock imitating Picasso in the 1940s. By then, globally-viral-Picasso was selling paintings for hundreds of thousands of inflation adjusted dollars.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#174Not the first time when the Default Country thinks they invented everything. The title is almost comical. Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe inspired by technological advances, globalization of trade and cultural exchange. Japanese art made huge blast, photography pushed to seek new forms of expression, social progress demanded new messages and new images. We had impressionism, post-impre…
Both Hitler and Stalin only respected/allowed representational art. They both hated abstract art. Any promotion of non-representational art was in effect a rejection of Stalin (and Mao and Kim).
Socialist Realism was the name for the representational art promoted by Stalin, Mao & Kim. It was always a propaganda piece.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_realism
https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/s/socialist-realism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_in_Nazi_Germany
https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/d/degenerate-art
If there was anything that Default Country did better than Commieland, the CIA would promote it. Art? Sure. Why not, some people like that stuff.
Thanks for the new term.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just about the "American art scene". Western European artists in the same "genre" also got funded in similar ways. > The rest of the world lived it's own life. Perhaps, but this is not about what happened in Mongolian or Indonesian art scenes, but mostly focused on the cold war theater of US and Western Europe.
First of all, what "genre"? I assume, abstract expressionism? Second, why would anyone fund specifically abstract expressionism and for what purpose given the diversity of art movements of that time? Third, what do you even know about contemporary art of Europe to make such bold claims?
>I assume, abstract expressionism?
Yes, abstract expressionism, but also other mostly US-led scenes like pop art to a degree.
>Second, why would anyone fund specifically abstract expressionism and for what purpose given the diversity of art movements of that time?
It had a US lead at the time, easier to explain US institutions promoting and do cross-continent exchanges and sponsorships, and conveniently apolitical compared to other art movements of the time.
>Third, what do you even know about contemporary art of Europe to make such bold claims?
Quite a lot, being from here, and familiar with both their history and the relevant literature.
A hardly a bold claim at all, it has been studied and reported in books such as "The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters" (The New Press), "How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art: Abstract Expressionism, Freedom, and the Cold War" (University of Chicago Press), "Pollock and After: The Critical Debate" (Harper Collins) and others, and of course the topic of TFA.
Your opposite claim would be the bold one.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#176Far more things/movements are orchestrated than are organic. This is to me one of the most surprising things I have learned as I got older.
I think the first time that was brought to my attention was one of our host's essays: The Submarine.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#177Incredible to believe the CIA has more sway over artistic movements than actual artists.
The CIA hires "actual" artists, all the time and in great numbers. They have a creative writing division.
If you watch YouTube interviews/documentaries about the CIA, one of the things that all of them point out is the disguise division, which makes some fascinating facemasks and other disguises.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree. I felt like I wasn't interested in art. I just didn't like it. Turns out, it's not a "me" problem, it's an "art" problem. Once I got involved in the furry community I discovered how beautiful art can be. My whole house is full of furry artworks, and I'm commissioning more. Those artists create things that are fun, novel, original. As opposed to "abstract New York no. 41715". But the deeper problem is that an a…
Out of curiosity, can you link to a publicly available furry work to help someone curious get into it? And help to know what to look for to appreciate it.
It really depends on your taste. If you want to be up to date with the latest stuff, then browse profiles on bsky or Twitter. furaffinity.net is a bit old school, but still active. e621.net is where you can find lots and lots of stuff and there are tags, but I rarely actually browse it.
My first experience with furry was a Tumblr blog of a guy who reposted art he liked and had exactly the same taste as me. Tumblr is a dead wasteland now though.
You'll have to browse through a lot of trash, but once you get a decent list of artists you like, your experience will improve dramatically.
Sounds a little vulgar, but IMO you should start with things you find sexy because you'll enjoy it even if the quality isn't there. Once you get a foot in the door, you'll be able to look for decent art that isn't porn.
Also, artists tend to be overworked and overly sensitive, which creates a lot of drama. Just ignore that.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#179I was hoping they would go into how modern printing made lithography a household method. Then maybe go about protecting intellectual property from convincing replica's. They didn't go into that. Not even a passing reference into Tenet.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#180Who's behind the transgender psy-op? That's the one I really want to know.
> Who's behind the transgender psy-op?
Right wing nutjobs who think the most important thing in the world is what exists between your legs. A few years ago there were news stories about a family that decided to raise their child "gender free" and that they would not announce the gender of the child to the world. The outrage that story produced was astonishing. People who would never in their entire life meet that kid were having fits because knowing what genitals that kid had was more important than anything else in their life.
Also the author of Harry Potter stories is rabidly transphobic. She's spending millions of dollars on propaganda and hate groups. It is so bad that none of the actors who played in the HP movies want anything to do with her. She's so angry at that that she's financing remakes of the movies with politically reliable/subservient staff & actors.