Art

wikiart.org/en/paintings-by-style/luminism?select=featured#!#filterName:featured,viewType:masonry

>Also the ancient greek sculptors and renaissance painters would all be extremely rightwing by today's standards
Would they be right wing then? Obama who didn’t support gay marriage at first would be right wing too. Just like how some occupations are associated with traits, much of art is associated with creativity, madness, and lack of practicality. In this sense Hitler’s was truly artistic, especially his ideas of weapons. nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/see-strange-cannon-it-was-hitlers-secret-weapon-crush-allies-82056
> The German Heavy Gustav was the largest gun ever built. It was more than 150 feet long, 40 feet tall and weighed almost 1,500 tons. The steel giant Krupp A.G. made only two, and neither worked well.
Thanks I love the colors. It sucks I have to go back in time to have quiet for politics but it’s so embedded in expression that I was pondering the existence of current good artists who aren’t woke. If the left controls the art, they control imagination. The right is good at memes at least.

>Everything is political. We can’t run away from it.
Wrong
This is the line you are fed because there's a desire on the part of certain "thought leaders" to give the government rights to intrude on every aspect of your life. But those things aren't innately political. There has always been a divide between the government and the society, with the society governing its own conduct and behaviors and the government deciding on economic regulations, military action, and diplomacy. The idea of modernity that the government has a role in controlling discourse over social objects is just that, an idea of modernity. It's not historical, not part of the generally accepted sphere of the polis, and therefore not political. It's just someone's opinion. Every stance on an issue is "just an opinion" yes, but not everything is a "political opinion". Or else the term is meaningless, right? Think about this. If everything is political, then the term "political" doesn't distinguish anything. Who does that benefit!? THE PEOPLE WHO WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR PERSON. Don't fall for this trap. If everything is political, then the word "political" doesn't refer to the same thing it's used for in, for example, "political theory", or when someone says "national politics." because those clearly distinguish that there is a category of thing of special interest. Political theory is not the study of "everything". National politics is not "everything in the nation".
>but lots of art theory is useful but too left leaning for me.
Art theory is just the nature and methods of producing art. Discussions of the "purpose" of art or what makes something "true art" aren't art theory. They're wild conjecture and the opinions of random people.

You come to love it after a while. There definitely is some conservative art out there (Any Forums for example has a lot of original art), but like many have said it's nice that sometimes art is apolitical too. I know of some conservative musicians: John Maus, Rush, Frank Zappa, Megadeth, Type O Negative...the list goes on.

I don’t make it political, others make the statements political. One example is John Berger’s male gaze. His theory is very feminist and left wing, but it’s useful as a theory to have an appeal to depicting females in sexual manner. In fact most female entertainers today appeal to this theory. Look at what Madonna does to her photos.

Do you like to listen to them? Maus says otherwise.
>In a 2017 interview, Maus placed himself "left of left of left of left" on a political spectrum. He stated that "it comes down to, if you don't have a sort of indignance when you see atrocities committed, you're not communing with the same humanity that I am." Furthermore, in response to accusations concerning his association with alt-right figures, he condemned white supremacy as a "cult of a race and blood—that's an absolute obscenity. That's nothing other than disaster. That's just inarguably obscene, that sort of ideology."

Okay, user, let me explain something to you, which I think you don't understand.
Some retard artist calling something "political" does not make it political.
Just like some retard on the street saying a bicycle is actually a car does not make it one.

What makes something "political"? It's related to a theory on the organization of how a group of people should be governed. THAT'S IT. Nothing else is political. You need to understand this because the term is being used to cow you into treating this with a level of respect it doesn't have. John Berger's idea of the male gaze IS HIS OPINION. It's not left wing. It's not right wing. It's not feminist, it's not misogynist. It's literally JUST HIS OPINION.
IT'S JUST A THING THAT JOHN BERGER THINKS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO CARE ABOUT IT.

The theory that the government should have a role in deciding whether paintings use the male gaze IS political. And feminists call it that BECAUSE they want you to implicitly accept the premise that the existence of the male gaze falls in the same category as, e.g., who should be allowed to vote, or whether we should declare war on Russia. There is NO overlap in those categories. You are being targeted for propaganda by specific factions with certain opinions on the role of the government, and by saying "the male gaze is political" you are ACCEPTING THEIR PREMISE.
That is the entire goal, user. They don't care that much if you even disagree, but if you accept their premise that the male gaze is political, you are acknowledging that the government COULD have a role in regulating.
Stop accepting the fucking premises user. Just make art.

Sorry I think I understand. You are saying that it is a cultural lens only. I had a very strong feeling that he was a liberal, he talked about valuables being turned into paintings and becoming valuables themselves. I don’t know if you heard of or watched this but it was a very communist feeling documentary I found very interesting but seemingly politically charged. By political I mean how you’re perceived, something as innocent as an OK sign can be racist for instance.
I can do my best to stop seeing art in that way, but I cannot make others project their ideas onto me and it is exhausting to fight if my creation is not left enough for not having some woke symbolism or if my opinion on something is wrong so everything is wrong. Because the art world is so social I can work in isolation but it won’t be as strong without networking with people who think in this manner. I think streamers are the least likely to get canceled though so maybe it’s best to look into platforms that are less cancel friendly.

All great artists are considered conservative in retrospect now.

>he talked about valuables being turned into paintings and becoming valuables themselves. I don’t know if you heard of or watched this but it was a very communist feeling documentary
Sounds like specific strains of critical theory, especially semiology. Look into Baudrillard, he had some great conjecture on those points which I agreed with as a strong conservative.
>By political I mean how you’re perceived,
I know you do. You should accept that there are groups of people right now who are DEEP purity spirals. Meaning they will never accept work that falls outside an increasingly strict bound of acceptable material. Don't try to come to terms with these people (you clearly know that, I'm just saying it). Find new fields to work in.

You should ask yourself what you want to get out of art and how you want to get it. If your only method of survival is art, you will need to come to terms with the fact that the people you deal with are dangerously zealous, and you will need to wear a mask around them if you want to fit in. Otherwise, you need a backup plan.
Streaming's probably a good idea. You should also consider trying to nurture arts in people you know are conservative. Build the community you want to live in.

It is why I was wondering if all of art is buried in corralling ideas into these theories for others to buy into. I know he wrote simulation and simulacra which is very interesting to me as an idea and the idea of hyperreality: the internet being a good example. French philosophy is interesting to me, I don’t hate Foucault because he was good at explaining concepts.