this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2025
35 points (100.0% liked)

El Chisme

426 readers
128 users here now

Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.

Rules:

Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.

Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 4: No sectarianism.

Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hollowmines@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't think I even like the initial premise that it's art's job to be "materially useful"

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That's fair. But art still falls into politically useful, politically useless, and politically harmful categories. I'm going to prefer the useful and I'm going to tell people to make more of the useful and less of the useless, while actively trying to prevent the harmful.

With that said. I'm not going to say something useless but entirely unrelated to politics should stop. Just that people making political art could do so in a different and more useful way.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

L'art pour l'art arose out of 19th century France when the French bourgeoisie finally controlled the entirety of French society. Art being done for its own sake or being done as a form of self expression arose out of capitalist society. This was 100% not true in feudal society where artists weren't expected to even credit themselves. Various socialist art movements like socialist realism also eschews l'art pour l'art for its literal bourgeois origins.

The idea of some dirt-poor artist channeling their mental illness to produce sublime art is just some stereotype that arose out of capitalist society.

[–] hollowmines@hexbear.net 2 points 14 hours ago

I thought this instrumental funk album I put on was neat, dismayed to learn it's actually bourgeois decadence.

[–] Thallo@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So we're not allowed to do art for art's sake?

When I make paintings that nobody but me will see or write poems that nobody will read because I enjoy the process and creating art, I'm doing a liberalism? Lol

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 1 points 1 day ago

I think there are many ways to approach art, but "art for art's sake" shouldn't be seen as a model. If anything, it should be treated somewhat dismissively.