Perhaps Moore's latest crockumentary should be dedicated to Vladimir Lenin, the artistic muse of the agitprop attack film.
To: .cnI redruM
Some argue for circumstance, positing that if Julius Caesar had been born illiterate in 640 A.D., no one alive today would even know his name. Others would counter that if Thomas Edison had been born illiterate in 640 A.D., the printing press would have been invented nine centuries or so earlier.
I was born illiterate!
To: .cnI redruM
There is certainly something to what you say. However, the French Revolution certainly used Art as a Weapon. A great deal of pornography was produced, featuring Marie Antoinette ("proving" to the people that she was unfit to be Queen). The great painter David then portrayed Napoleon (and other revolutionary figures) in ways that helped sway public opinion.
Moving past that, the Spanish painter Goya and the French painter Millet portrayed victims of the Ruling Class and working peasants in ways which were designed to evoke sympathy.
Lenin contributed, but did not originate, the Art as a Political Weapon meme.
3 posted on
06/30/2004 8:24:18 AM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
(The Fourth Estate is a Fifth Column)
To: .cnI redruM
![](http://www.is.bham.ac.uk/erc/postergallery/images/posters/russian10big.jpg)
The text reads:- The conditions for economic growth are the heightening of discipline among workers, a lessening of the workload and intensity of labour and an improvement in its organisation.
7 posted on
06/30/2004 8:33:53 AM PDT by
ijcr
(Age and treachery will always overcome youth and ability.)
To: .cnI redruM
Place mark for an interesting discussion.
9 posted on
06/30/2004 8:52:53 AM PDT by
kitkat
("The democrats would rather win the WH than the war." - Tom DeLay)
To: .cnI redruM
Some argue for circumstance, positing that if Julius Caesar had been born illiterate in 640 A.D., no one alive today would even know his name. I think he was, actually, born illiterate. Despite that, the article brought up some valid ideas.
10 posted on
06/30/2004 9:03:19 AM PDT by
Mr Ramsbotham
("This house is sho' gone crazy!")
To: .cnI redruM
-"This is why "Roger and Me" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" are seen as works of art..."-
Oh, please! It's seen as art only because it's in the form of a movie. Otherwise, it can be put on TV in the form of a Rat political commercial, and nobody'd know the difference.
I can take a picture of my toilet bowl, slap some pithy political wordage on it, and somebody would call that art. Even if I do it just to con the art whores.
To: .cnI redruM
BRAVO!
This is what is behind every piece of modern "art" involving excrement, rotting meat, and mindless smears of paint.
The point of "art" is no longer to inspire or induce the viewer to reflect on life, but to rub the viewer's face in the hatred today's "artists" feel toward anything good or decent.
15 posted on
06/30/2004 10:05:14 AM PDT by
FierceDraka
("Party Before Country" - The New Motto of the Democratic Party)
To: .cnI redruM
Ars Vitae?
Try Ars Humungous.
18 posted on
06/30/2004 2:06:01 PM PDT by
dangus
To: .cnI redruM
19 posted on
06/30/2004 4:54:30 PM PDT by
Cannoneer No. 4
(I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson