To: ifinnegan
Isn’t one of the goals of communism to eliminate inspiring art, so that what is left is bizarre, abstract, or depressing?
18 posted on
11/04/2016 5:47:58 PM PDT by
GnuThere
To: GnuThere
Performance art seems to frequently fit that mold.
21 posted on
11/04/2016 5:51:59 PM PDT by
Rurudyne
(Standup Philosopher)
To: GnuThere
Check out this video:
https://youtu.be/OS0Tg0IjCp4 - one of her meet & greets with the elite, a bunch of zombies, and it's speculated Podesta is along the wall in red sweater 10 secs in
To: GnuThere
I have a relative who traveled to the Olympics one year, before the Iron Curtain fell - it must have been Sarajevo.
She went to an art gallery (she was someone who had gotten her degree in art and architecture) and said that it was one of the most depressing ‘art’ experiences of her life - no beauty, nothing uplifting, everything pedestrian, dull, dark. She also said that all of the natives she encountered seemed to be chain-smokers, and/or drunk.
There was no real *inspiration* in the lives of the people.
27 posted on
11/04/2016 6:01:52 PM PDT by
Jamestown1630
("A Republic, If you can keep it.")
To: GnuThere
More the opposite. The strategy was to replace bourgeois abstract art with "Soviet realism," depicting in realistic concrete images the progress of the revolution. Not unlike official art from the Nazi regime.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson