On Statues
Aug. 20th, 2017 05:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
amyvanhymStatues and monuments are works of art. In the war on free expression the first things to go are works of art, because art encourages free thought by being simultaneously beautiful, accessible, multifaceted and mysterious. Art draws the audience toward psychological freedom. Authoritarians, who peer at the world though an ideological lens of pure power, understand that psychological freedom is a threat to their desired monopoly. So, they misrepresent nuanced works of art as single-minded and offensive, as "against us" for refusing to be "with us," and destroy such art as an act of political conquest. Communists, Marxists, Nazis, Fascists, Islamists -- all are art-hating authoritarians. All seek to destroy the value and meaning in the freely organic cultures they invade in order to install their own. They destroy art and replace it with propaganda in service to their own hubris, their own greed, their own insatiable lust for control over others.
Monuments don't exist to be blindly worshipped. Those who wish to tear them down are simpleminded types who worship their own ideas, and are projecting that unhealthy degree of reverence onto their perceived enemies. These monuments exist, and remain, as historical bookmarks, inviting the common people to live among them contemplatively, remembering the long uphill journey of progress. If an ideological enemy does worship a monument, the only way to dispel the error is through discussion, as removal of the monument only further entrenches the misconception that historical monuments are equivalent to idols, erected and demolished as meaningful acts of psychological warfare in a black-and-white world.
Lauren Southern on the valuable role of monuments in maintaining historical consciousness:
The first ten minutes of Sargon's This Week in Stupid are dedicated to the statue issue:
"Where does it stop? It doesn't. [The monuments] have to all go, because they were not part of the current ideological zeitgeist. They come from a morally inferior history -- that everyone has. Everyone has a morally inferior history. Moral innovation is like technological innovation: it has been progressing throughout human history. There was a time in history where slavery didn't exist. And do you know what happened after a conquest? All of the people were simply killed. Slavery itself was actually a moral innovation. Not a very good one, not a very advanced one, rather cruel in some ways, but it was probably better than just being butchered. To judge the past by the morals of the present and to find those people morally inferior is like saying that medieval knights were bad at war because they didn't have guns." (2:04)
Note also that monuments erected to be worshipped can have their meaning drastically altered by their environment, without any destruction taking place. In Seattle, a statue of Lenin is attracting attention:
Sadly, it seems the protesters didn't do their research -- unless they're going for irony, as they are mistaken in ways similar to the ways their alt-left opponents are mistaken, though more obviously and demonstrably so. According to its wikipedia page, what was once a monument to Lenin and Communism is now a monument critical of Lenin and Communism. The statue is no longer in its original context. Its hand is regularly painted blood-red. It is privately owned, and is for sale, and is used in commercial advertisements. It is regularly dressed in drag for Pride and has also been dressed as John Lennon. It is very clearly the conversation piece it should be. While caution should be taken in applying permanent changes to historical works of art (the late sculptor's name was Emil Venkov), and the balance of positive and negative meaning should be portrayed as accurately as possible, allowing room for such visual representations of cultural discourse may be a constructive way to prevent idol worship and division among people.
"Artists are going out into the unknown and representing it imaginably. So what does that painting mean? Well, if the artist knew that, he'd just write it down. The art is beyond what is articulable; otherwise it's just propaganda."
-- Jordan B. Peterson
All monuments were designed by artists. All sculptures were sculpted by artists. The way to overcome divisive propagandistic oversimplicity in art is by promoting openness to the discussion and contemplation of skill, beauty, meaning and history.
(Posted to![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
free_speech, freedom_of_expression and amyvanhym. Yeah, by the way, I made a new community: freedom_of_expression. I'm the only one there right now! Must find ways to siphon new members from below Dreamwidth's dusty desert...)
Monuments don't exist to be blindly worshipped. Those who wish to tear them down are simpleminded types who worship their own ideas, and are projecting that unhealthy degree of reverence onto their perceived enemies. These monuments exist, and remain, as historical bookmarks, inviting the common people to live among them contemplatively, remembering the long uphill journey of progress. If an ideological enemy does worship a monument, the only way to dispel the error is through discussion, as removal of the monument only further entrenches the misconception that historical monuments are equivalent to idols, erected and demolished as meaningful acts of psychological warfare in a black-and-white world.
Lauren Southern on the valuable role of monuments in maintaining historical consciousness:
The first ten minutes of Sargon's This Week in Stupid are dedicated to the statue issue:
"Where does it stop? It doesn't. [The monuments] have to all go, because they were not part of the current ideological zeitgeist. They come from a morally inferior history -- that everyone has. Everyone has a morally inferior history. Moral innovation is like technological innovation: it has been progressing throughout human history. There was a time in history where slavery didn't exist. And do you know what happened after a conquest? All of the people were simply killed. Slavery itself was actually a moral innovation. Not a very good one, not a very advanced one, rather cruel in some ways, but it was probably better than just being butchered. To judge the past by the morals of the present and to find those people morally inferior is like saying that medieval knights were bad at war because they didn't have guns." (2:04)
Note also that monuments erected to be worshipped can have their meaning drastically altered by their environment, without any destruction taking place. In Seattle, a statue of Lenin is attracting attention:
Sadly, it seems the protesters didn't do their research -- unless they're going for irony, as they are mistaken in ways similar to the ways their alt-left opponents are mistaken, though more obviously and demonstrably so. According to its wikipedia page, what was once a monument to Lenin and Communism is now a monument critical of Lenin and Communism. The statue is no longer in its original context. Its hand is regularly painted blood-red. It is privately owned, and is for sale, and is used in commercial advertisements. It is regularly dressed in drag for Pride and has also been dressed as John Lennon. It is very clearly the conversation piece it should be. While caution should be taken in applying permanent changes to historical works of art (the late sculptor's name was Emil Venkov), and the balance of positive and negative meaning should be portrayed as accurately as possible, allowing room for such visual representations of cultural discourse may be a constructive way to prevent idol worship and division among people.
"Artists are going out into the unknown and representing it imaginably. So what does that painting mean? Well, if the artist knew that, he'd just write it down. The art is beyond what is articulable; otherwise it's just propaganda."
-- Jordan B. Peterson
All monuments were designed by artists. All sculptures were sculpted by artists. The way to overcome divisive propagandistic oversimplicity in art is by promoting openness to the discussion and contemplation of skill, beauty, meaning and history.
(Posted to
free_speech, freedom_of_expression and amyvanhym. Yeah, by the way, I made a new community: freedom_of_expression. I'm the only one there right now! Must find ways to siphon new members from below Dreamwidth's dusty desert...)