Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Class #16 postgame

EXCELLENT CONTRIBUTION TO THE HARVEST, COMRADES:

The level of participation in class today was great!

IDEAS DRAFT:

Thursday night, comrades! Friday morning at the latest. We must meet our quota for the next harvest!

HERE'S WHERE ALL THE NAZI-APPROVED ART LIVES ON THE INTERNET:

1055 images here (painting, sculpture, photography). Sadly I fear many of us are too racially degenerate to be able to appreciate it. Oh, and here's a Hitler original.

And here's an interesting/frightening radio story about the evolution of Neo-Nazism in today's Germany from a radical fringe movement to an increasingly mainstream political movement.

SOVIETS VS. NAZIS:

Can someone who took good notes remind me what we wrote on the board about the aesthetic/political similarities & differences? Here's what I remember:

-Soviet feminism vs. Nazi gender traditionalism
-Nazis using race to create a classless society vs. Soviets using "dictatorship of the proletariat" to create a classless society
-appeal to the collective will... it should be noted however that Soviets think everyone should be an artist whereas Nazis are more interested in regulating the production of a specific class of artists
-Soviet internationalism vs. Nazi nationalism (Soviet Union as "united states," Soviets consider nationalism & racism a bourgeois illusion)
-both use anti-capitalist rhetoric, but in different ways... in Germany it is often paired with anti-semitism, and it's not like the Nazis got rid of businesses altogether... I mean, think of Volkswagen for instance or the collaboration of the Nazis with Coca-Cola (no seriously)... vs. the entire basis of the Soviet Union is anti-capitalism... all the business are nationalized & state run
-Nazi's ambivalent attitude toward "modernity" in general and modern art in particular... the idea of a future return to a glorious past, nostalgia, with Weimar as a terrible wrong turn... vs. Soviets' total embrace of modernity (but Soviets didn't like some abstract styles of art because they found them confusing or symptomatic of bourgeois individualism... and remember, Soviets went right from being peasants under a monarchy to being communist revolutionaries... they didn't have that in between democratic / moderate phase, and they didn't want to continue any elements of the past)
-related... Soviet use of technological and urban imagery in their "realism" vs. Nazi's use of nostalgic and agrarian imagery in their "realism"
-use of propaganda... Soviets essentially believed that all art was political propaganda, while Nazis acted like only degenerate art was political (despite using art as political rhetoric themselves)

SENSUALITY VS. BEAUTY IN LONG BEACH:

This is the article Moeller was referring to about a dispute over a nude painting in Long Beach. I think my weirdo artist neighbor who lives next door actually knows this woman. (He's an interesting case in himself... he works as a painter on construction sites by day and paints art like this by night. Very Bauhaus I guess.)

IS THIS ART?:

Japanese water fountain.

SOMETHING ELSE TO PONDER:

I may use this for class discussion next week. Besides the M.I.A. + Jay-Z + Kanye + Lil' Wayne + T.I. and Radiohead + U.C.L.A. marching band mashups, the other interesting moment at the Grammys, to me, was the dull speech that the director of the organization gives every year. Except this time it wasn't dull because he called for the Obama Administration to create a cabinet level position for Secretary of the Arts (like Secretary of State, Treasury, Defense, Energy, etc.). Is this a good idea, because it would encourage greater funding for arts education? Or is it a bad idea for the political state to have regulatory power over the arts... isn't that what Hitler & Stalin are doing?

14 comments:

  1. Personally, I don't think the Japanese water fountain is art because I see the production of the images as a more technical. The programming that went behind these images had a cue in which it released or stopped the water. I compare it to the simple images created by a computer. But then again computer images can get pretty complex...(idk where i'm going with this)

    And I think more funding for art education is a good idea..but what are the consequences of have the state to regulate art?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't know why it's displaying my sn ...how did it take my name those other times?

    this is Yen by the way

    ReplyDelete
  3. why were there so many works of art of nude women.. i thought Nazis preferred women to be depicted fully clothed or at least alone in the nude?

    ReplyDelete
  4. you're logged in with your aim account instead of your google account i think. and the nude women has to do with the beauty without sensuality thing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well i just watched every second of the japanese water fountain. i think i am a little tired and i just zoned out!

    i do not think that is art though. i got a "technology" vibe. i dont know how to explain it but i felt like it was just innovation not artistic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. oh and by "hitler original" do you mean that he painted it himself?!?!?!?!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Holy Cow! I think that the Japanese water fountain is definitely art. I am sure it took a lot of math and programming to design that thing. I don't think that its art in the general sense of the word, its more of a collaborative piece of work. Its purpose was entertainment, but there was no "istoria", but I don't think Alberti's rules should influence the way we look at every piece of work.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow! That Japanese fountain is amazing! I actually watched the whole five minutes, haha.

    Personally I do think this is art. Although it does give that "technical" vibe like what the others are saying but 'art' shouldn't be limited to just painting, drawing, or stuff like that. Anything that takes skill to make is art. That's just me though...

    ReplyDelete
  9. ohh i don't have a google account and i've always signed in with my aim :/

    ReplyDelete
  10. I watched that video of the Japanese fountain twice! It's amazing how people are able to make these sorts of things; my mind is still in the process of figuring out how people were able to create this kind of fountain. Which brings me to my point, it is a work of art. Not all art has to be entertaining like this fountain is (i.e. http://webs.wichita.edu/depttools/depttoolsmemberfiles/ulrich/kollwitzcrop.jpg, unless you have a weird sense of humor) but I believe it has in its purpose to induce some sort of response in the people who view it. Whether it is disgust, anger, or in this case, amazement, an artist intends to evoke an emotion from his or her audience by means of combining certain media with his or her skills. The artist (or artists) that created this fountain probably spent a great deal of time to configure whatever technology made it as awesome (with his engineering and artistic abilities) as it is with the intention to amaze the visitors of Canal City, and that is what makes it a work of art.

    ReplyDelete
  11. As for the funding for art education...didn't Hitler and Stalin support a certain kind of art? If our government were to follow suit, I'm sure a large number of people wouldn't be too happy; it would be unfair for those who wished for some other art. It would be nice, though, if there was some funding (enough so that art programs won't disappear or be on the brink of disappearing), but as much as I love art, I think that it might not be a good idea if the education of art has the same amount of funding as the education of other subjects (it shouldn't have too little of funding either). Studying aesthetics makes me really angry...

    ReplyDelete
  12. This message board is blowing up! Either you guys are starting to worry about your grades, or the revolution of HH 214 is gradually gaining force.

    Sarah: Yes, Hitler painted it.

    Ankita: Your other points notwithstanding, are you arguing that something collective can't be art? The Soviets certainly disagree.

    Amanda: I think it was the audio recording of his autobiography, Dreams of My Father.

    Other Amanda: There are federal organizations that fund the arts, for instance the National Endowment for the Arts. And I guess public television. These are always controversial with right-wing groups in the U.S. for two reasons. First, they often object to the content of some of the art (take the Mapplethorpe example discussed in the Course Reader... try this... go to Google and type in "Mapplethorope Portfolio X"... you probably have to turn off the adult content filter first). Second, they often argue that their is a left-wing bias in the way this funding is distributed. So it's not like the fed. is not involved in the arts to some degree. But a cabinet position would certainly take things to a new level. My sense is that it would be far too controversial to ever happen in the U.S... I was asking the question more as a thought experiment. I think the Grammy guy was sort of being a pompous ass, but it's definitely true that arts & music programs in public schools are woefully underfunded. As are physical education programs, actually.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I definitely believe that the Japanese water fountain is art. It probably took a lot of time and collaboration to produce it (Think of how long it must have taken the engineers to figure out the distances and time to expel the water from the top in able to synchronize the droplets to produce an image or phrase). If they wanted to, they could write out messages or tell a story if they wanted to. I'm sure it would take a very long time though. It just seems hard enough already to have to figure out how to make a heart of write out the words "Welcome."

    And I believe that the suggestion of creating a Secretary of the Arts would lead to some sort of corruption in art. I understand that it does help promote and support the arts, but I believe there can be other institutions or organizations built separately to help raise money and promote the arts. I really don't think that they should bring art into the cabinet. Next thing you know, there will be a Secretary of Entertainment and it'll be like "1984." Maybe that's too extreme, but that's how I feel about it.

    ReplyDelete