/lit/ - Literature

File: 63 KB, 487x400, c6778c24a30ab32cdf5252252f5b037b--battle-of-marathon-marathon-running.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:26:27 2019 No.13109693 [Reply] [Original]

I'm coming to see more and more that the tumor killing modern literature and art writ large is the present day's complete and exclusive fascination with "personal art"
Art and the artist have become one in the same and no one is interested in those truths that transcend identity and speak to the soul of our species. It's all about the struggles of the artist, the life of the artist, the societal pressures on the artist, the identity of the artist. When the scope goes beyond the individual, it stays firmly within the individual's kin, and through that exploration, of course, the artist's identity is also explored. And when the artist faces struggle, it is only marketable if there exists someone else who does not also face the same issue.
Poems just long autobiographical sentences littered with thoughtless paragraph breaks. They dwell on how the artist has been wronged and how the artist has struggled and the things that the artist has done and seen.
Creativity is gone and we have atomized ourselves as little struggling seeds, each with a story that must be told, while we have completely lost sight of what bonds us and that which is beyond us all
Beauty isn't the sublime anymore. Now beauty is the bravery of wearing an orange tank top as a "revolution" against the adversity we like to pretend we face in the easiest era of human existence.
Weep for us, /lit/. We're dead.

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:40:35 2019 No.13109794

Ah, the soothsayer, the one honest man searching in the day with a torch, another Diogenes with his lamp at noon. Beyond the histrionics, your little philosophy here is a personal phantasm in it's fearful guise, paraded around the neighbourhood dangling at the end of a pole as an objective effigy of a coming doomsday: you've come to this conclusion probably partially through exhaustion (I bet you're old), and because it confirms you to yourself as he who has seen the truth. You'll no doubt see it everywhere; you have to or you'd be to yourself just the burned out never-was most people probably see you as. And you're probably not even an expert in any means or large consumer of up-to-date art. You sound like you're describing fucking Robert Lowell or Cindy Sherman, oldhat.

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:43:51 2019 No.13109821

>>13109693
Look how much individualist we have become. Nobody can fight for anyone than a extension of himself. The culture of the self- the ego, worshiped in the social media, the minorities, etc. There is no strive for eternal things nor trascendental. The problem relies on ourselves.

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:52:25 2019 No.13109888
File: 2.11 MB, 2100x1331, art.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Daily reminder that people who complain about the degeneration of art have never read a book on aesthetics, art history or art criticism. Daily reminder that people who complain about art degeneracy are about on the same intellectual level of pop music listeners who complain about classical music being "too long", i.e. children throwing a tantrum over something that they don't immediately understand because they can't immediately understand it. Daily reminder that people that invoke "beauty" are praising the immediate reaction as superior to the learned aesthetic understanding: if they had their way the art that they deem "beautiful" could never have been made. Daily reminder that they often conflate the terms "beauty", "Aesthetic", and "sublime". Daily reminder that these people think that photorealism is a good thing.
Daily reminder that in spite of all the talk of "correct aesthetic standards" they have never touched a book written by a formalist art critic, nor do they know that formalism is an actual thing. Daily reminder that the "muh degenerate" crowd ignores all the sociocultural situations under which all the different currents of modern art have been born: they ask the artist and the viewer to be purposefully ignorant of history and historically deaf, despite the fact that the art that they champion as standard of aesthetic beauty has never been historically deaf (i.e. the renaissance, romanticism). Daily reminder that these people have probably never been to Rome, Venice or Paris. Daily reminder that these people often complain about eroticism being present in art despite the fact that eroticism has been present in art since the Greeks (since prehistoric times, to be more precise).
Daily reminder that if these people had their way we would never have had all the Van Goghs, all the Otto Dixs, the Renoirs, the Modiglianis, the Picassos, the Kandinskys, the Matisses, the Monets, the Cezannes, the Klimts and the Joyces, the Rimbauds, the Eliots of the world: these artists that we correctly understand as being geniuses would have been classified as "degenerate" and thrown into a trash bin. Daily reminder that the most representative spokesman of this crowd of resentful minus habens is someone who thinks Metallica is good music. And, last but not least, daily reminder that there are even today a ton of artists who reject the avant-garde of the last century in order to paint in a more traditional or realistic way (there is, in fact, a whole website dedicated to this kind of stuff: artrenewal.com) but the "muh degeneration" crowd doesn't know about them because they don't actually care about art.

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:52:56 2019 No.13109893

>>13109794
up to date modern art- from what i can tell is just formulaic identity politics discourse, self promotion, things which had already been done to death 50 or 60 years ago. only bloodless left liberal cultural managers (who hate art and love scolding people) and self promoting trust fund hacks would have anything positive to say about it.

Anonymous Mon May 13 16:57:03 2019 No.13109921

>>13109794
I think you've peeled back too many layers best left unspoken
Of course I speak with hyperbole here. Of course I can not be familiar with all art and art criticism being generated today, nor do I have anywhere near a complete familiarity with the art of the past. I can virtually guarantee that there still exists art and artists who are not so taken with identity.
However, and I think this should generally be understood implicitly, I am commenting on what I see as a very deeply rooted cultural fact that I think we've all had to navigate in our lives. School curriculum still combine both the (relatively) old and the new, but you should really think about what new work is being pulled into the canon. Nearly all of it serves this same obsession with identity. When I consider the art I've watched my classmates make and the art I've seen become popular among them, it all fits this template as well. I think it is hard to deny that adversity and struggle have become significant focal points in modern marketing; a lot of civilian thought is devoted to that now.
Just think of the NYT best seller list.

Now here's a possible explanation: this is something that has always been true, and it is far more often that which transcends contemporary identity which is carried over to future generations. I can't prove that isn't the case. But even if it is, and my yearning for a better past is delusional, by making this post perhaps I can call on just a few authors to consider whether their art is merely personal or if it touches something more infinite than that. Perhaps I can get just a few more people working to breathe life into an ever-ailing collective breast

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 17:00:45 2019 No.13109943 >>13109921 >>13109821 Have you read Christopher Lasch's books, namely the culture of narcissism and the minimal self, sound like you'd be interested in them.

Anonymous Mon May 13 17:07:17 2019 No.13109974

>>13109921
all art is about identity, all politics is identity politics. Universalism, all talk of the transcendental and sublime, the infinite the telos and meaning of history, was just a prop for a social powergame of domination placing identities over others through means explicit and implicit. Even the 20th century avant garde was based on colonialist eurocentric master narratives and an unwarranted fetish of authenticity. I for one am happy that art can finally be freed from all mystique and made to work for the greater progress of society, the liberation and representation of all previously marginalised and or repressed identities and individualities and the collective celebration thereof.

Anonymous Mon May 13 17:18:08 2019 No.13110053

>>13109974
>I for one am happy that art can finally be freed from all mystique and made to work for the greater progress of society,
Hmmm.
>all art is about identity
If this is true, what exactly has changed to make you so happy?

>Universalism, all talk of the transcendental and sublime, the infinite the telos and meaning of history, was just a prop for a social powergame of domination placing identities over others through means explicit and implicit.
This right here, this way of viewing the word, is exactly what I find so tragic about modern art. You've been robbed of your connection to the soul.
We've been here on this earth for an unimaginably long time and what has changed from generation to generation is nothing compared to what has remained true of both ourselves and the environment we inhabit. To claim that our fascination with that which persists through existence has always been nothing but a ploy by tyrants to stomp out threats to their transient power is to cut us off from the deep magnificence of the fact that we are here. It is utterly sad.
I genuinely hope you try to challenge this idea, even if just for a few moments

Anonymous Mon May 13 17:35:58 2019 No.13110125

>>13109921
Ironic, since I'm inclined to write in a way that effaces my personal presence as best as possible; yet, I was clearly alienated by the initial manifesto. As such, take it for granted that when you try to bring down the sky you're not going to so much as hit any given target but crush everything indiscriminately.

Anonymous Mon May 13 17:42:30 2019 No.13110149

>>13109693
You're spot on. There needs to be a separation of art from the artist. Most "artists" nowadays are attention-seeking fags who want to look cool, it's all about presenting a good image. If I ever publish anything, it will be under a pseudoynm. I would just like for my work to be appreciated, I don't care if people don't give a shit about me as a person. Artists need to transcend past their egos and write to tell a story worth sharing, not because it's by them but because it's for all of us.

Anonymous Mon May 13 17:54:44 2019 No.13110211

>>13110053
you have to understand why the fetishisation of authentic experience makes people uncomfortable, sure it would be comfy to live out this heideggerean fantasy of being a peasant in the black forest, year marked by rituals, linking life to death and resurrection, a landscape punctuated by church spires pointing skywards and gravestones downwards into the ground, or be like guy debord and trip balls all day in the city of wonders making every second of your existence into a mindblowing work of art. But we gotta be considerate, and most of all we gotta be realistic. Would you think the same if it was you he who laid under the tyrant's boot? it may be a transient boot but its a boot nonetheless.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 17:57:28 2019 No.13110229 >>13109693 Shut up gay

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 17:57:34 2019 No.13110230 File: 7 KB, 227x222, 1527076032040.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>13109921 >>13109693 >>13110211 you really need to get that prose checked, it's sickeningly purple

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:00:42 2019 No.13110247 >>13110230 struggling to see what you're finding purple in any of those posts are you sure you're not just a brainlet

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:02:19 2019 No.13110254 >>13109693 Lot of samefagging in here. Go back to chasing butterfly OP, and being butterfly for that matter. We know it's you.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:02:31 2019 No.13110257

>>13110247
>a landscape punctuated by church spires pointing skywards and gravestones downwards into the ground,
> city of wonders making every second of your existence into a mindblowing work of art.
>Would you think the same if it was you he who laid under the tyrant's boot? it may be a transient boot but its a boot nonetheless.

hmm idk you tell me

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:03:50 2019 No.13110265 >>13110257 That guy was responding to OP

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:05:23 2019 No.13110272 >>13109693 you uncultured types... you don't cry for the dead Give them not praise. For, deaf, how should they know It is not curses heaped on each gashed head? Nor tears. Their blind eyes see not your tears flow. Nor honour. It is easy to be dead.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:05:29 2019 No.13110273 >>13110265 OP is like half the people in this thread.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:07:12 2019 No.13110279 >>13110273 That post was arguing directly against the OP You need reading comprehension before you start critiquing others' writing

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:07:41 2019 No.13110285 >>13109888 Thanks, anon. Any book recommendations?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:10:29 2019 No.13110294 >>13109974 >all politics is identity politics Then what's the point in using the term identity politics? It has no meaning.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:12:08 2019 No.13110311

OP I still disagree with you and lovely to see you were asspained enough to make an entire thread about it.

If you can't extrapolate one person's experience to the wider human condition we can all empathise with, that is YOUR fault as an autist, not ours. In every sense of the word you are unironically, unmemetically autistic.

Again, screw off.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:12:22 2019 No.13110312

>>13109693
It just seems like human nature to me for most people to care more about people than ideas. I don't know if i'm just assuming that because of the culture i live in or if it's always been true and we only pay attention to old writings about ideas instead of past society's posts on greek gossip walls.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:12:35 2019 No.13110313 >>13110254 >>13110273 I'd recommend against making accusations of samefagging unless you actually have 4chan X and can see when new posters entered the thread

>>	Heaven Mon May 13 18:16:47 2019 No.13110331 >>13110279 >>13110313 samefag. saged.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:18:03 2019 No.13110336

>>13110311
>If you can't extrapolate one person's experience to the wider human condition we can all empathise with, that is YOUR fault as an autist, not ours.
The people who might need to hear this most are those who dismiss the entire western canon because they stubbornly refuse to believe that someone who didn't know what it's like to be them could have anything relevant to their own lives to say at all.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:19:56 2019 No.13110345 >>13110331 So you're this "heaven" guy I've been hearing about

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:23:49 2019 No.13110362

>>13110336
>dismiss the entire western canon
As in, no one on /lit/. Why are you posting this here? Do you want asspats from an echo chamber? To pretend to say something groundbreaking when it's merely derivative?

I like how you swung 180 when called out, by the way. Friend. To so easily dismiss your own thesis. Real rock hard stone, eh?

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:29:07 2019 No.13110387

>>13109693
The tumor killing modern art is over saturation. Everyone and their aunty is an artist now that basic necessity is a given. What happens then is what’s most accessible floats to the surface, and becomes what is objectively beautiful because it’s relatable, leaving what the individual, especially for those outside of the average, would enjoy lost in a sea of easy to understand and commonplace mediocrity. We, being individuals with unheard voices, remain as the cusp of esotericism, only bested by those who choose to keep their writing to themselves. Basically what I’m saying is identity exists more and more the more you’re heard, and being unheard has become a requisite for enlightenment, as the fight to be heard remains a plague. You don’t like the way things are because you’re a hipster, that IS what a hipster is (disliking the norm), but that’s not a bad thing, I’d go as far as to say the quieter you are in this world the closer to achieving true beauty you become.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:30:58 2019 No.13110400 >>13110311 >you are unironically, unmemetically autistic. why the ableism

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:31:09 2019 No.13110401

>>13109693
>>13109821
These are my thoughts as well. The self, the Ego, is intrinsic to Western culture. Everywhere in our history we see it, from realistic depictions of people in paintings since the Renaissance to the difference between Emperor and Pope in the Holy Roman Empire. Luther's Reformation simply "cut out the middle man" and put the self in direct contact with God. Western democracy and universal suffrage are also an aspect of the Ego in that everyone must have a say in how they are governed. Contrasted with ancient Greek democracy where only male citizens could vote. The hyper individualism of modern society is the final epoch of the Ego which Western society has been heading to for centuries. Therein lies OP's problem of the modern artist.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:33:40 2019 No.13110415

>>13110387
you're wrong about that. picasso, shakespeare, homer, cervantes, they all wanted to persuade the public to accept their art. to do that, you have to play the part of a prostitute. put on a bit of make-up, be a little bit dishonest, you have to give something the public can follow.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:35:58 2019 No.13110423

>>13110362
>As in, no one on /lit/
That's correct. Unfortunately, /lit/ is not the totality of modern critics, professors, consumers, and tastemakers, all of which strongly influence the subject of this board: literature.
>Why are you posting this here? Do you want asspats from an echo chamber?
Does this thread look like an echo chamber to you?
Are we not having fun talking about this?
Do I seem upset that people are arguing against what I said?
>I like how you swung 180 when called out, by the way.
I dialed back on some hyperbole I threw in for the sake of being dramatic. Drama keeps a thread alive, it's a tempting thing to include. I'll own up to it being a bit childish and dishonest. If you don't see that my main point is completely intact across my posts, though, I'm either really not communicating clearly enough or you aren't paying close enough attention.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:36:53 2019 No.13110428 >>13110415 All I’m saying is modern art is dead because in this day and age whoring out your work is the opposite of what’s considered beautiful. (Unless your art is mass appeal which is a different beast entirely)

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:37:17 2019 No.13110430

>>13110336
you are obviously not used to feeling uncomfortable , you have to be used to feeling uncomfortable cause you are obviously privileged and overly secure in your identity. in order for progress to happen, boundaries and cannons have to be transgressed, it is a transgressive way of seeing criticism and artistic practice, not as autonomous but as biased by a miriad prejudices and power structures, statistically and empirically demonstrable. people that are used to feeling comfortable have to understand the discomfort everyone else experiences, ''that's wrong, that's unfair, that is not art, i thought we were all equal already and art was my own little glass bead game completely detached from society and the life and death issues less fortunate people face'', why is it that 'they' are obliged to relate to the western cannon, but you wont relate to their lived experience? The modern approach to art centers empathy and recognition of difference against any reified idea of the eternal or the avant garde.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:38:05 2019 No.13110442 >>13109693 Ok only read a bit but come the fuck on, literature has always had the personality of the author in it Read Don Quixote, Cervantes is practically the third main character

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:42:41 2019 No.13110468 >>13110428 & i'm saying that's not right. shakespeare inherited old revenge plots, picasso painted casserole dishes.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:47:18 2019 No.13110488 >>13110468 I’m completely lost as to what you mean, even with those guys their art didn’t really take off until they were dead, that used to be the requisite, be under appreciated and dead, now it’s just be under appreciated and dead eventually.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:52:50 2019 No.13110520 >>13110488 are you joking? we know shakespeare was very popular ("this side idolatry") and picasso was the richest artist in history (while he was alive, naturally)

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:56:33 2019 No.13110542 >>13109888 basé et rougepilulé

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:57:18 2019 No.13110544 >>13110520 Oh I might just be dumb

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 18:57:49 2019 No.13110549 >>13109693 Hey bro pass that shit.

Anonymous Mon May 13 18:58:43 2019 No.13110555

>>13109888
>the Van Goghs, all the Otto Dixs, the Renoirs, the Modiglianis, the Picassos, the Kandinskys, the Matisses, the Monets, the Cezannes, the Klimts and the Joyces, the Rimbauds, the Eliots

all straight cis white men who would have gotten #metooed if they were alive today, how perfectly innovative and avant garde!

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 19:00:26 2019 No.13110564 >>13110555 truly, the only thing that matters

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 19:01:36 2019 No.13110566 >>13110555 not to mention anybody complaining about degeneracy would put this entire list squarely in the 'degenerate' section.

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:02:03 2019 No.13110567

>>13110442
Not only do I agree that the individual is always present in the work, I don't think it would be possible for that not to be the case. The point is that you don't read Don Quixote just to learn about, admire, and/or pity Cervantes. You may learn something about him as you read, but there's also something larger than that.
>>13110430
I'm unsure of your point
You are of course correct that I am privileged, but I am no enemy of transgression or radical criticism. Art exists in a particular culture at a particular time and it is inevitable that it will be biased towards and influenced by the sensibilities of its origin. I'm not stupid enough to deny that
The problem is that a great deal of modern "radical criticism" is so used to taking aggressive aim at the established and "classical" that they are only capable of seeing the bias at this point. It is nothing but an irredeemable enemy to them and they will gladly tell you just that. It is at that point that you have lost your grip on the threads that run through us all. And when that mindset starts to incubate its own art, it is an art that exists only to be contrary to all that "old stuff," which includes the beauty of the shared human condition. That's when you start writing books that aren't "for" certain people. Recognition of difference is good and important, but in the absence of recognition of the shared, it is soul-poison.

No one is under any obligation to read the western canon. You should be free to take any path you want through the arts. I never said they have any obligations, and never said I can't relate to their experiences. I can and have.

Surely you at least see my point here, even if you disagree

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:04:25 2019 No.13110580

>>13110285
Gombrich's history of art is a nce accessible entry point to art history for brainlets like you and me.

Diderot wrote a treatise on Paintings, Goethe wrote many essays on art including one where he answers point by point to Diderot. Stendhal wrote on Rome and its art and beauty in general, and all of Baudelaire's piece of art criticism are excellent.

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:08:14 2019 No.13110595

>>13110387
I'm none of the above posters and I have to say what you wrote struck a chord.

Poe already conjectured that the greatest geniuses are the one who don't cave in to the urge of exposing their works to an audience. Maybe in this day and age this is something will should heed as advice more than ponder as a hypothesis.

"I write for myself, for my friends, to soften the passing of time."

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:10:38 2019 No.13110606

>>13110567
I'm just saying that maybe what you think of as the shared human condition is really a narrow and parriochal and obviously privileged identity which in your hubris you extend to all of humanity as an universal? what if those threads that run through us all are the threads imprision in us within the systems of race, colonialism, gender and capitalism? really you should get into postcolonial and queer criticism, instead of dismissing these things as an adversary you have to understand were they come from and seriously assume responsibility and come to terms with your role in perpetuating them

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 19:12:51 2019 No.13110622 >>13109888 you ought to be ashamed for writing this

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:18:36 2019 No.13110661
File: 247 KB, 1920x1080, assisii rain 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>13110567
>Not only do I agree that the individual is always present in the work, I don't think it would be possible for that not to be the case.
c'est vrai. whatever you do, however much you think you're not writing about yourself, in fact every page you write of a novel, every scene, even if its about people quite unlike yourself, says something about the writer and at the end there is a very fair sense of the writer in the readers mind
if someone is readable at all he or she will say just what sort of person is doing the writing
art, in any medium, is a conversation with the artist

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:27:34 2019 No.13110705

>>13110606
I think I'm making a very reasonable point that you seem unsure about allowing. I think as someone who identifies strongly with those theories and modes of criticism, you have of course developed an emotional connection to them as well as an intellectual one. I'm telling you, you should allow this. Your picture of the world will be more complete if you do.

Every human has a vast assortment of properties
In every human there exist properties that are totally or partially unique to them
However, by the very existence of our word "human" and the fact that we all understand what that word means, there must also exist at least some properties that are shared among every human, by definition or by existence.

To ignore where all of our circles overlap in the great Euler diagram of mankind, past present and future, is to ignore a fundamentally real object, and I think it is an absolute travesty.

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:49:03 2019 No.13110822

>>13110606
All humans need food
All humans need sleep
All humans know conflict
All humans know fellow humans
All humans know joy
All humans know sorrow
All humans know boredom (this varies with wealth and lifestyle but I think it's still a universal)
All humans know some things
All humans do not know some others
All humans have minds

The human brain evolved in many diverse landscapes across many diverse times but those facts all played a role in that common development.
I don't understand how you can't be extremely interested in our joint effort to explore, understand, and draw inspiration from what we all share

Anonymous Mon May 13 19:52:27 2019 No.13110836

>>13110705
>In every human there exist properties that are totally or partially unique to them
>However, by the very existence of our word "human" and the fact that we all understand what that word means, there must also exist at least some properties that are shared among every human, by definition or by existence.
this should be put on loudspeaker in humanities departments like the Muslim prayer call

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 20:04:37 2019 No.13110894 >>13109888 Nah that shit is just awful. Takes a lot of education to be this dumb.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 20:30:22 2019 No.13111008 >>13110606 >>13110430 please stop posting, im going to break out in a fucking rash

Anonymous Mon May 13 20:31:06 2019 No.13111014

>>13110567
if you belonged to a marginalised identity, say if you were trans or a person of color, and you were presented with two people, mind you you don't know anything about them except one of them really likes harry potter and the other one is really into Plato, Dante and Joyce. Who would you rather trust? this could be as is often the case with marginalised people a matter of life and death, who is least likely to be a murderous bigot and why? If reading classical literature does not make you a better person and might even make you a worse one, then what is the point?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 20:35:32 2019 No.13111044 >>13111014 >If reading classical literature does not make you a better person and might even make you a worse one, then what is the point? Being less wrong when I say things.

Anonymous Mon May 13 20:45:59 2019 No.13111090

>>13111014
Alright champ, I was really trying to be patient and fair with you but I think it’s about time we wrap this sesh up.
Unless you’d like me to give trans people and people of color an abhorrently low amount of credit, I’d find a less fucking stupid way to tell my friends and enemies apart. Good god above

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 20:56:55 2019 No.13111127 >>13110822 >I don't understand how you can't be extremely interested in our joint effort to explore, understand, and draw inspiration from what we all share Cause it's all so blasé.

Anonymous Mon May 13 20:57:16 2019 No.13111131
File: 15 KB, 300x225, 300px-Icycalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>13109888
>Briefly, then, the hipsters are ready to worship as art any object whatsoever, however ugly and worthless, provided it belongs neither to antique art (which they regard as outmoded) nor to popular art (which is, well, popular)

>they find in this so-called "modern art" a means for advancement in what I call "the slave game" — the game for social distinction. To take each case separately, the hipsters — being generally stupid, lazy, utterly talentless, with no skills whatsoever, usually even extremely ugly — need some sort of trick, some sort of cunning, subterranean stratagem in order to compete with the strong, the intelligent, the beautiful and the talented, and they find this in affecting an air of "higher intellectuality" — in attempting, that is to say, to appear as if they stood on a higher plane compared to everyone else at least in one respect: in the intellectual-artistic sphere — a sphere in which they have observed that uneducated people (i.e. those who lack a solid philosophical background) are extremely easy to dupe.

> then, art no longer serves to give pleasure in itself, but is instead used as a chip in the slaves' game of social distinction, as a means to an increase of social status — and it is this increase which provides the pleasure, and for the sake of which the artfags and the rich will stop at nothing to appear to be worshipping little preposterous, repulsive, useless knick-knacks. So we see that even in this case, the most extreme case of ugliness in art (for in the entire history of art nothing has ever been created even remotely as ugly as modern art — Baudrillard: "thus painting currently cultivates, if not ugliness exactly... then the uglier-than-ugly (the "bad", the "worse", "kitsch"), an ugliness raised to the second power") — even in this case the artworks (i.e. the knick-knacks) still manage to give pleasure, but indirectly — not through the effect they have on their owner, but due to their effect on everyone else — on everyone but the owner! A fact which explains why these "artworks" no longer need to be beautiful — quite the opposite in fact, they must necessarily be ugly, otherwise they'd end up becoming popular and would no longer be suitable to serve as the ultimate chips in the slave game.

>What is most remarkable about this whole business, and can be discerned only now, once it has been properly analyzed, is how the artfags, who reside at the bottom of the slave game, and the absurdly rich, who stand at the top, end up turning to the same means in their struggle to raise themselves higher, and in a sense collaborate, with the artfags creating repulsive trinkets and the rich buying them up, thus meeting each other at the point of inversion — where the game comes full circle, and reveals itself for what it is.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 21:01:25 2019 No.13111151 >>13111127 only people can be blase

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 22:48:57 2019 No.13111648 >>13111127 Just kill yourself then, would you?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 22:52:03 2019 No.13111667 >>13111014 Braindead

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 22:54:25 2019 No.13111678 >>13109888 based trips

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 23:14:07 2019 No.13111755 >>13110894 >>13110622 You ought to be Ashamed for writing this

>>	Anonymous Mon May 13 23:17:54 2019 No.13111772 >it's a muh photo realism fags get dabbed on thread I go for a bird walk if I want to see something real.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]