← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 3912 | Posts: 5 | Started: 2002-12-08
2002-12-08 18:42 | User Profile
I am posting this here because I think the public needs to read this -- twice. -- J.R.C.
Art Is Political
by J.R. Colson
December 3, 2002
Ever since I read George Mosse's book Nazi Culture, I have held an opinion about "modern" art that I do not voice often enough: that modern art is political, and that that's the reason it has been so praised by our popular culture in recent years. That style of art is really "anti-art" -- an attack on White standards disguised as "new and revolutionary talent."[1][2]
In Mosse's book, both Hitler and Goebbels are shown stressing the importance of art as a culture-shaper. Indeed, the Nazis believed that great art fosters great culture, and that awful art fosters awful culture. The Nazi-controlled Reich Chamber of Culture banned modern art -- e.g. Picasso -- from public display. Only quality art, such as paintings by Titian, Leonardo Da Vinci, or Caravaggio was allowed for German public viewing. Hitler himself said that the visual arts were the most powerful aspects of a culture. Further, Hitler had 6,500 modern paintings removed from German art galleries -- works that were being championed by Jews all over the West ever since the infamous, modernist Armory Show in New York City in 1913.
It should not surprise the reader to learn that Jews led the movement to portray modern art as legitimate [3]. Indeed, the Jewish author William Shirer highlights his tribe's usual attitudes about modern art in his popular tome "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by poo-pooing Goebbels' attempts to restore fine art to its natural prestige in German society. Shirer laments the removal from galleries of works by no-talent urchins such as Gauguin, Matisse, etc. Shirer then makes the amusing claim that the Nazi-approved art shown in Summer 1937 was the "worst junk" that he had ever seen. [4]. The fact of the matter is that classic art in Germany was a no-no to the Jews because such traditional art preserved White, German culture. Couldn't have that! A better way of concluding the above facts is to say that the Nazis championed high-quality art and the Jews championed bogus art because the bogus art watered down German, i.e., Nazi, culture.
My conclusions about modern art's illegitimacy were solidified when I browsed through an art book recently and found the authors very nearly admitting that modern art is a weapon and nothing more. In the art book "Art of the Western World," by Wood, et al, modern art is mentioned in context with "socialist ideology"; further, modern artists are mentioned as being infected by "the spirit of rebellion"; those artists avoided the standard "conservative institutions" for their training, style and ideas. This is, I feel, a polite way of saying that modern artists like Picasso, Gauguin and Cezanne were thumbing their noses at traditional White art for largely political or class-baiting reasons.
Indeed, leftist politics and proletarianism abound in the most popular modern art: Picasso's famous 1937 painting "Guernica," a hodge-podge of ugliness that a retarded child could top, is embraced worldwide by wine-sipping doofuses simply because of its anti-Franco theme. Picasso brought his leftism into his art, and the critics loved him for that. [One of Picasso's ugliest paintings, his 1907 work "Les Demoiselles D'Avignon," has been called one of the greatest artworks of the 20th century -- a testament to just how low the definition of "art" has sunk].
The modern artist has no talent. He is embraced by leftist/Jewish art critics solely because he is watering down the centuries-old European cultural standard of beauty and excellence. Even worse, no-talent modern artists continue their assaults upon Western values with the aid of your White tax dollars, e.g., U.S. government art funding by the National Endowment for the Arts, which supports idiots who bend scrap metal into grotesque shapes and title those vomit-inducing works as "Walking Down Main Street at Noon with Sampson and Delilah in late Summer, 1992, Project 3," or similar, lofty titles designed to make junk appear to be sophisticated art.
Of further note concerning this topic is a conversion that this writer had with a web art gallery operator, who affirmed that modern art is not embraced by the mainstream gentile public. The gallery owner stated that Westerners eventually accepted modern art as legit only after years of clever cultural indoctrination that insisted that such art was simply picking up where Rembrandt and Raphael left off.
In summary, then, modern art is an illness -- a disease unleashed upon the White world by Jews, leftists and minorities. It is not art. It is instead an angry and deliberate assault on traditional European values.
[1] book "Nazi Culture," by George L. Mosse, 1966, Universal Library/Grosset and Dunlap. [2] "Modern" art began around 1850 with works by rebel artists that had been rejected by salons and boutiques due to their creator's lack of skill; in fact, popular modern artists, e.g., Van Gogh or Gauguin, had great difficulty selling their crude creations when they were alive. Most of those artists died in poverty. The art book "National Gallery, Washington," 1968, mentions that modern, i.e. Impressionist, artists suffered both "public and critical hostility" in the late 1800s.
[3] Jews as central to the American art scene: "The fact that Jews are so dominating in the art world is a reality that is very rarely publicly acknowledged. It is forbidden -- as always for anyone, anywhere -- to discuss the subject for fear of being branded 'anti-Semitic.'" -- web book about Jews, "When Victims Rule," Chapter 26; [url=http://www.jewishtribalreview.org]http://www.jewishtribalreview.org[/url]
[4] book "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," by William Shirer, 1960, Simon and Schuster, pages 243-244, hardcover.
J.R. COLSON
2002-12-08 19:07 | User Profile
Before I became politically aware, I stumbled on a book in the university library called "Degenerate Art." It featured photos of all the stuff Hitler displayed during a degenerate art exhibition that travelled Germany.
I was surprised to find that I could not find even one ambiguous case of a painting or statue that perhaps was not degenerate art. Art is all about politics in a rotten society and Jew-infested Weimar was truly abominable.
I'm pretty sure this was the book-
[url=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0810936534/qid%3D1039374166/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-8648225-2281439]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/081...8648225-2281439[/url]
2002-12-09 02:18 | User Profile
Those who are interested in good art in the Western tradition should check out: [url=http://artrenewal.org/]http://artrenewal.org/[/url]
It has a huge archive of denigrated 19th century academic painters whose works are brilliant. Also helpful are several essays on factors leading to the promotion of the wretched modernism in the early 20th century. Unfortunately, the Jewish factor is not mentioned.
2002-12-09 04:45 | User Profile
Art Renewal is a wonderful resource - I spent a couple of hours there the other week feasting my eyes on the gorgeous works of true artists derided by the jew "art" establishment as "chocolate box painters".
Real art is beauty created to uplift the human spirit - not jew-marxist Piss Christs & elephant sh-t Madonnas.
2002-12-09 06:10 | User Profile
One seldom-noticed feature at the Art Renewal page is the availability of many of the featured canvases as art posters suitable for framing. Talk about a Xmas gift your friends will remember and enjoy long afterwards....
Another excellent and little-known resource of great if forgotten art are auction-house catalogues, such as Sotheby's and Christie's, who periodically run art auctions grouped around eras such a 19th CENTURY PAINTING & SCULPTURE and ART OF LA BELLE EPOQUE. The catalogs themselves feature upwards of a hundred canvases apiece, printed on thick glossy paper in glorious color, the negatives shot directly from the originals, and run about twenty bucks or so....a bargain considering the pristine quality of reproduction and the sheer number of brilliant artists, both celebrated and obscure, gathered together. In certain cases the catalogs come with a tipped-in page of auction results as well, always interesting albeit maddening (generally the only people not thunderstruck by the works on view are - naturally - those with the bread to buy them!)
I'd elsewhere pointed out that - as the fine rendering, craftsmanship and general aesthetic of the great European & American artistic traditions had been relentlessly driven from salons and galleries towards commercial art after WW 1 - one should not dismiss or overlook the 20th century fields of advertising art and book and magazine illustration. These are often dumped into the 'pop culture' category and treated as such by boho-types who believe art should be 'an assault' and who characterize little things like rendering & perspective as 'bourgeois obsessions'...don't you believe it. I've seen fruit-crate labels from the 20s expressing more vibrant beauty than all the state-subsidized sh*t-caked religious icons and roadkill glued to canvases, combined.