Subject: Re: crumbs!
AntiUtopia@aol.com
Date: Thu Mar 09 2000 - 08:45:23 EST
In a message dated 3/9/00 8:04:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
madhava@sprynet.com writes:
<< Scottie,
In my experience that first line isn't true, although it may be because the
artists I know are ones with more liberal poltical bents in the first place.
But leaving aside politics, which the lurkers seems to favor (even though
the great about a list serve is that you don't have to read any posts you
don't want, kind of like selectively sticking you fingers in your ears
without anyone else eing able to see you do it. Not to mention that one
thread in no way impedes the proliferation of another.) but leaving
politics, how about that second sentence? What is art about?
Love,
Madhava >>
I see where Scottie's coming from, and I think it's the school of art that
believes the "true artist" firmly grasps reality, tells what he or she sees
without compromise. Most artists, writers, etc....the creative types in
general...in the United States are politically liberal and would vote
Democrat, if for no other reason than it's the closest they could get to what
they want. But they would usually do so grudgingly, the Democratic Party not
being nearly liberal enough (especially after it adopted Republican platforms
after losing Congress -- course, no one sees that move as just as much the
will of the American people as Bill's presence in office).
I'm sure he will speak for himself, but these creative types -- the idealist
creative types (idealism being the basis of political liberalism) -- would
not be "real" artists then, at least not on the level of a Salinger. They're
representing what they want to see or think should be there, not what's
Really there. Their art is a lie.
Jim
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat Apr 01 2000 - 10:11:39 EST