Posted on 12/31/2008 9:00:58 AM PST by thinkingIsPresuppositional
The debate continues . . .
A few days before Christmas, we posted a guest contribution by Jeani DiCarlo and Yervand Kochar titled End the Leftist Establishment’s Use of Movies and Art for Propaganda.
The next day, another guest contributor sent in a strongly worded and empassioned retort in Artful Dodging: Ars Gratis Artis – NOT!
And now, the battle continues with two new elements. The first is from a reader who weighed in by email and has agreed to let us publish that comment. The second is a response to "Artful Dodging" from one of the authors of the original piece.
First, the reader's email comment:
Art for Art's Sake... And Who in the Heck is This ART Guy??
All art must stand on its own as Great Art, whatever the viewpoint. Am I moved, touched... all the rules of Aristotelean drama, catharses are important. And if it bills itself as a comedy, it better be funny.
That said, two observations... Robert Davi's film, "The Dukes" was a disaster for me. I found it badly written, full of holes, the acting was spotty and it was downright silly in many aspects. The story editor in me was itching to get her paws on the script and make a few suggestions, but unfortunately I was watching the finished product in a movie theatre in Newport Beach in March of 2007. It was bad art.. Fellow conservatives have told me I must support it because it was made by a conservative and has a so-called conservative message, even though its main characters commit a felony. (I love my crime stories, just don't try and call yourself something else.) "But it wasn't good!" I wailed. "I can't support something that can't stand on its own."
"American Carol" had its moments, and they were really funny, but it's not a good movie. The laughs were not consistent and it needed a cleverness boost in many places. Just because these two films were made by conservatives with conservative viewpoints does not make them good art. So I could not support these projects, could not recommend them to others, liberal or conservative.
"Law & Order" did and does a great job with examining conflicting liberal and conservativce views within the D.A.'s office and outside it. Dick Wolfe's big flaw is he keeps portraying evangelical Christian leaders as depraved criminals, I don't think I've seen a decent one portrayed on any of the various flavors of "L&O". But he is an equal opportunity offender now that I think about it -- Blacks, Puerto Ricans, Orthodox Jews -- they've all been bad guys. It just bugs me that religiosity is seen as a shield for moral sickness.
For me, art transcends politics. And if you have a political message, or any message, it still must be contained within a work of good or great art. If I want a message, so said Sam Goldwyn, I'll call Western Union except that they're out of business so I'll just Skype/text/Twitter it.
So to all conservative artists out there, make something good. Make me care about the characters and don't forget to make them rich and complex. Weave a story that interests me and by all means, surprise me. I love the Showtime series "Dexter" about a serial killer. Many of my conservative friends say, "Oooh I couldn't watch a show about a serial killer," and I say, "It's not Ted Bundy. It's a man with a code who kills only those who have committed the most heinous of crimes and have slipped through the justice system." This show doesn't endorse taking the law into one's hands, it doesn't endorse killing, it is ART. We get to really know this character and his life and every five minutes, it SURPRISES me. The depth of the writing and the understanding of the complex nature of human beings, I am just blown away with every episode and am just SICK, SICK I tell you, that this season's finale was last Sunday and I have to wait God knows how long till the next season starts up again.
Frankly, I side with the liberals in many artistic aspects. Not their political views, but their sophistication and willingness to accept the dark side of human beings. To put it like a fifth grader: Most conservative art sucks.
And now, Mr. Kochar's reply to Mr. Finefrock's "Artful Dodging":
Dear Mr. Finefrock,
Thank you for responding to our Manifesto. At this point, I will ignore the sometimes seemingly hostile tone of your response, which I believe stems more from your general and righteous anger rather than the content and purpose of our Manifesto. I will do so since I agree with most of what you say in terms of a conservative response to leftist manipulations of art and media.
That said, though you accuse us of "artful dodging" of confronting the left, I find not a single point in the Manifesto that discourages conservatives to promote our philosophy and worldview through arts. As a fact, we ourselves made a documentary in support of the Iraq war and were bashed and attacked by the liberal establishment for it. We also do not adhere to the "art for art’s sake" approach and understand that Beauty is not about showing colorful flowers.
Our point, which I am afraid you missed, is in denouncement of manipulating media and lying to push false ideas that are not accepted naturally. We strongly believe that conservative ideas need to be communicated without manipulating the medium they use. We do not need to force our ideas through indoctrination, but rather only by honest presentation.
I think our strongest point of disagreement is in the purpose of art. We believe that the purpose of art must not be political but transcendental. Art must lead people to the Truth through Beauty and not to a political solution through the use of beauty, however noble the political solution might seem to be. Just like truthful conservatism, it must lead people to a greater individual liberation and fulfillment and not to a merely political position.
I think this (at least intentional) separation of art and politics can produce true works of art as well as a correct political expression through arts. If conservatives employ the Marxist approach to art, we will end up with the same poor art and entertainment which is so disliked by the majority of the Americans today.
Sincerely,
Jeani DiCarlo and Yervand Kochar
RebelLight Media
Who's right? Does most conservative art "suck"? Should we fight fire with fire? Is beauty the road to truth?
Yes, we should use art. In fact, I think conservatives need to start developing our own parallel alternatives to everything the lefties control.
The answer is NO (and Yes).
The Iconic approach employed by OBAMA(TM), a Warholian ripoff by Shepherd OBEY Fairey destined to rival the Campbell soup can label paintings, is creepy. Creepier than wakuing up in bed next to the Plastic Burger King head.
Even post modern liberals recognize the markings of a tyrant and oppressive state when they see it. The Post Modern Progressives at WFMU were creeped out by the Obama Jugend choir singing Fearless Leader’s praises.
So NO. Do NOT employ this approach, even if “hip” artists and directors like Vincent Gallo offer their services.
No, rather makes works that inspire the individual. Frank Capra is still slurred by the Left but his works show a bitter darkness (people on the brink of suicide/death/expulsion), they aren’t all light and cheery. They stand the test of time.
I suppose it’s OK as long as it doesn’t become angry and hatefull the way liberal “art” has become.
Good luck with this theory.
The Soviets had a concept of agitprop “art”. It is was propaganda first and foremost.
The Left studies Eisenstein, Reifenstahl, and other propagandists.
Fritz Lang turned down working for the Nazi Machine. So did Greta Garbo.
Leni DID make a conscious choice to serve EVIL.
I have watched the way leftists/tribes use film to sell their point of view on issues such as the Klamath dams. They make their fillm and hold film nights for screening in regional venues. There is no comparable film maker documenting the natural resource user’s point of view. Therefore, the public never hears about the twenty year process of intensive voluntary effort by local landowners (farmers, ranchers, timber companies) to restore salmon habitat. All they hear is that farmers and loggers are bad guys.
Even Dr. Seuss gets into the act with the Lorax and the new Dr. Doolittle is right behind. “Happy Feet” and “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” all of these carry a political message. Where is the other side of the story?
We get great street theater from the left with giant fish puppets and traditional fish smoking in downtown San Francisco, but nothing to highlight the 150 year old historic ranches and their culture. They get large grants, we get nothing.
It is like all the left brainers gravitated to the right and all the right brainers to the left. At least the conservatives could fund art to support and showcase conservative culture, values and beliefs.
The only problem with this is that the news media is over-whemingly liberal...so much so is that any form of “conservative” entertainment is branded as hate speech or racist, etc. Just look at Limbaugh. He been out there for over 20 years, and the left media still portrays him as racist. Secondly, “conservative” entertainment is not going to so much press as say the Cannas film festival. Thirdly, most conservative media can be just as self-preaching as “liberal” media. Nobody likes to be preached at when they chill out $10 a pop. Additionally, since Hollywood actors tend to be liberal, you are not going to get a lot of films made either...unless you throw a whole lot of money at them. Chances are they are probably just going to denounce them after they make a movie. Just look at Alec Baldwin and The Hunt for Red October. Also, conservative media tend to be very limited. Just look at those “Left Behind” movies—they are made primarily for an evangelical audience, and never have really made it into the mainstream. Not, every conservative thinks that Barrack Obama is the anti-Christ. And, they can be just as uptight as leftists. I mean, whenever, there is a “sex comedy” released everyone just denounes it as something perverted—and probably walk out in the middle without watching the whole entire thing to get the message. Sometimes you need to be offensive to make a point. Look at all of those violent cop movies—they’re filled with tons of violence and sex, but the good guy—the right wing cop—always wins in the end. Also, conservatives just don’t have the money base to make big picture movies. You would think that all these rich Republicans would get together and form their own distribution company. But, lastly, and I’ve made this point before, is that conservatives tend to complain alot instead of acting. The complain about how Xmas tunes are banned in public schools, but none of them ever file a civil rights lawsuit like the left always does.
The only problem with this is that the news media is over-whemingly liberal...so much so is that any form of “conservative” entertainment is branded as hate speech or racist, etc. Just look at Limbaugh. He been out there for over 20 years, and the left media still portrays him as racist. Secondly, “conservative” entertainment is not going to get as much press as say the Cannas film festival. Thirdly, most conservative media can be just as self-preaching as “liberal” media. Nobody likes to be preached at when they chill out $10 a pop. Additionally, since Hollywood actors tend to be liberal, you are not going to get a lot of films made either...unless you throw a whole lot of money at them. Chances are they are probably just going to denounce them after they make a movie. Just look at Alec Baldwin and The Hunt for Red October. Also, conservative media tend to be very limited. Just look at those “Left Behind” movies—they are made primarily for an evangelical audience, and never have really made it into the mainstream. Not, every conservative thinks that Barrack Obama is the anti-Christ. And, they can be just as uptight as leftists. I mean, whenever, there is a “sex comedy” released everyone just denounes it as something perverted—and probably walk out in the middle without watching the whole entire thing to get the message. Sometimes you need to be offensive to make a point. Look at all of those violent cop movies—they’re filled with tons of violence and sex, but the good guy—the right wing cop—always wins in the end. Also, conservatives just don’t have the money base to make big picture movies. You would think that all these rich Republicans would get together and form their own distribution company. But, lastly, and I’ve made this point before, is that conservatives tend to complain alot instead of acting. The complain about how Xmas tunes are banned in public schools, but none of them ever file a civil rights lawsuit like the left always does.
The REAL Dr. Seuss is dead and used his art FOR America against the Axis Powers in WWII.
Some folks are into that.
But they can't keep griping about "useless" liberal arts degrees and then wonder why few artists are conservatives.
Setting up a ghetto industry to be marketed on talk radio won't be very profitable culturally. Artists who can't serve a broader audience are mere hacks.
While there are significant structural barriers to conservative-friendly art, a determined, talented, friendly person can overcome them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.