I'm saddened by the events that took place in Charlottesville. Having reported on several white nationalists who had connections to Trump, or were pro-Trump— such as the Tilly family who organized the Fayetteville rally, it is even sadder that more attention wasn’t paid to this topic before Trump snatched power.
That said— something else strange has happened. The removal of confederate statues has got everyone suddenly interested in art— and no one is talking about the art itself— or the simple way to deal with white supremacists by reminding people about the basic principles of how an art show works. It is temporary. Impermanent. Up for a month, then gone. In the larger sense, this is a truth which we will all have to face regardless of race, religion or creed. Nothing in the physical world lasts, and there’s no getting around it— at least until they find a way to download our consciousness onto a thumb-drive or a toaster, or whatever you choose for a body in the next life— or if you prefer a celestial explanation— It is something we must face unless it turns out that the aliens who created the monoliths at Pumapunku come back to bring us to live with the Bigfoots in heaven. Whatever your belief— one day, the show must end.
I'd even say the Rushmore faces desecrating the Black Hills could go too, since the founders doubtlessly participated in genocide against the native peoples of this continent. That said, the defacement has been done— So, I'm not sure what the solution is in that case.
What I find strange is I'm getting a lot of folks art-splaining at me that Hitler and the nazis loved art, and in fact stole quite a bit of it since they loved it so much.
I'm glad you all saw "Monuments Men." It was a lovely film. And while Hitler was an artist, and loved to steal it, the nazi idea of what "art" was, was very similar to their ideas on race. Nazis singled out "degenerate art" for ridicule and destruction. Anything that was un-German, or communist, or pro-Jew, or maybe gay was put on their list, just like the lists that Donald Trump and his buddies like to make.
I have heard people say "Hitler had good taste in art." Well, not only were his tastes in art limited to that which exalted "blood and soil" values of racial purity, militarism, and obedience-- but jazz was out. Experimental or "non-western" music was out. If rock-n-roll or hip hop existed, they for sure would've been out too. Films that didn't fit their nazi vibe were also most definitely out.
In the early 1900s, artists favored abstraction-- Cubism, Dadaism and Surrealism. Under the Weimar Republic, Germany was holding it down as a center of expressionism and resulted in films like Nosferatu and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.
Yes, dictators claim to love art-- but first they destroy their own, then create new art which adheres to their "values," and in reality are doing nothing more than creating propaganda. "Taste" is a matter of opinion, and selectivity of "Western" art tends to be code for something else-- a dog-whistle going back to Adolph. Gavin McInnes and his "Proud Boys" are all about "Western values." But, this would go hand in hand with Gavin's video, "Ten things I hate about the Jews." You do the math. It is a very slippery slope.
If you want to talk about Hitler "loving art," keep in mind, a whole lotta, lotta "degenerate art" by Picasso, Dalí, Ernst, Klee, and Miró, (considered masters by the art world) was thrown on a bonfire by Hitler's guys on July 27, 1942, in the gardens of the Galerie nationale du Jeu de Paume in Paris.
So, while, I get that plenty of you are trying to be funny, remember, Hitler was no more a "lover of art," than he was a "lover of humanity."
If anyone remembers back to the 2012 election-- I went through the same thing. I had a good deal of anti-GOP art hanging at a space in Cambridge. There were creations for Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, and a whole list of others. After about a week on display, I was out playing an anti-war song which an influential Ayn-Rand-conservative did not like. She caused a scene, and had me kicked out of the place. A couple nights later, she had the curators remove my art in secret. While they did not destroy the art-- It is a slippery slope.
There's also a lovely video of the police during a 2015 Marco Rubio campaign event removing some of my artwork— that was ironically pro-Rubio. This was a strategy I adapted to show that even when the words the artist chooses are in favor of the State-- by virtue of the aesthetic not fitting in, it can and will be deemed offensive, despite not being in violation of any laws.
Regarding the confederate monuments-- I'd say, treat them like any other art show-- though as propaganda-- they don't even deserve that much credit. That said-- for the sake of argument, remember, if the curators (town committees in most cases), want to take them down-- then case closed. That's how an art show works. If they are put in storage, they can be examined for future generations to learn from-- and maybe those "blood and soil" creeps with the tiki torches will lock themselves inside the crypt with their statues.
And— by the way— If art was so important, the National Endowment for the Arts budget would be septupled, and the US would have 800 art museums around the world, rather than 800 military bases.
Keep supporting the arts!
RodWebber.com