04/05/2010: "The Revolutionary Spirit"

I remember the sixties as if they were yesterday. We voiced our theories about conspiracy, and they were accepted by a unified mass of believers. We believed that together we could change the world, and although all our goals might not have been clear, at least one of them, ending the war in Viet Nam, seemed to have been achieved. We were awed by our own power when we marched on Washington, and everybody could see how many we were right there, on the television.
What about today? If we marched on Washington today, would anyone even come? The phrase, '...what if they gave a war and no one came?...' drifts back to me from the past. I look around me and see that all my fellow revolutionaries have become old and fat, bald and grey. Today, most of them are worse than those we rebelled against once were. Worse because they're so Pavlovian about what they care about, and so indifferent to anything else.

Mostly, it's money, and the symbols of wealth that they need to convince their peers that they are in fact successful. Notice I no longer say 'we'. Not that I don't need money. I do as much as anyone else does, to survive, and to feel I haven't been done in by 'the system'. But somehow I have managed not to get suckered into running 'til I drop on a mouse wheel not of my own making, like pretty much everyone I know has, except the trust fund kids.
They, mostly not due to any effort they themselves have made, are the only true revolutionaries left. They haven't given in, like all my peers burdened by credit card debt have. They haven't become cogs in a machine, and remain pretty much free to do whatever they want. I know a lot of them, because a lot of them are artists.
Jeff Koons, Fernando Botero, Julian Schnabel, are all products of extreme wealth, as well as thousands of others like them. Talent is not an issue for such people, it is an unnecessary and unimportant accessory. However, rare as it may be, when talent is required, it can be simply and efficiently bought from someone else.
If a mechanism of social control exists, and its hard to imagine that it doesn't, what is the oil flowing around its gears that keeps the whole thing running smoothly? What is the biggest risk to its functioning that the most attention is paid to? I would say, that a revolution topples it. The product it is producing cannot be anything else but wealth and power.
If I've got your attention and interest up to this point, then I imagine you'll accept that if revolutionaries have simply disappeared from the stage, when only thirty years ago there were so many of them, then there must have been a strategy executed by someone to make this happen. It is just too convenient for both government and multinational business for it to have been a coincidence.
This is not a conspiracy theory, because there is no one is indicated as a target, and I haven't said that the intent is evil. It is a general observation about what is most likely given our current state of affairs. Certainly we haven't had any big wars lately, and that is a good thing.
There is a conspiracy theory going around that Aspartame is an intentional attempt to diminish the world's population. Monsanto, one of the largest multinationals in existence, has introduced Aspartame into nearly every diet product in existence, throughout the world. If a person decided never to take Aspartame, it is virtually impossible that they could avoid it altogether. Pharmaceutical companies use it to produce a sweet coating for a lot of pills, it is in soft drinks, sugarless gum and candies, and found even in many kinds of bread and cakes. Some believe Monsanto bought the German company responsible for the production of the Zyklon B used by the Nazis for human extermination. Those who believe in a conspiracy involving Aspartame have invaded the internet en masse, you can just google it and you will see what they have to say. These people would say the oil making the gears run smoothly is Aspartame. Others would insist its the fluoride in the water.
Our role as artists is to see the world for what it is and comment on it in our art. We cannot continue to work as individuals, gazing at our own navels and pretending that whatever we choose to do is valid. The role of artists is to understand the present, foresee the future, and to arouse people to action through their work. Perhaps the current situation in which artists have virtually nothing in common with one another, is the reason why we haven't had any Man Rays, Picassos or Van Goghs for more than a half a century. The responsibility of an artist is great; they must understand the big picture about the world in which we all live, and comment on it in a way that even the simplest human beings can understand, or at the very least, feel. We should seek the spirit that unified us in the sixties, find a little common ground, think a little less about our individual struggles, and act towards a shared goal. Whatever that may be. Any ideas?

Replies: 10 Comments

on Wednesday, April 28th, Andrew said

Revolution, yeah, like a wheel...you've given me a new take on this subject...that what appears to be new returns again as the wheel goes round, and only from a distance can you see the whole cycle.

on Sunday, April 25th, Adrian said

It might mean that...I see it like a revolution. Comes from a song by who I cant remember....but some other words have something to do with '...dont know where I'll be tomorrow'. Pretty much sums it up.

on Friday, April 23rd, Andrew said

Adrian, you sound pretty convinced about whatever you just said, but please forgive me if I don't have what it takes to follow/understand your reasoning. The wheel in the sky, does that refer to time passing by?

on Monday, April 19th, Adrian said

A misunderstanding at that, Andrew. I was merely pointing that often times there is a consensus belief in the workings of a certain expression, that gets taken to be the reality of what is happening, when, in actual fact, this is not the case. You might also be included in this, seeing that your knowing so much about how to cut it in the big world. But I have come across this before and I , for one, do not have the patience you require, in order to play mind games. The wheel in the sky keeps on turning....

on Friday, April 16th, Andrew said

Adrian, in the first part of your discussion, you seem to agree with me when I say the only people free to be revolutionaries are those whose financial problems are taken care of.
You then say, if you make your living from art, then what you produce is not the same as what you would produce if you didn't. How about, that the concerns you have are different from those most people have, ie., making a living? Can you speak of the human condition that you don't share?
I personally share my notions on how to make a living through art, and although sometimes I make money from such lectures, those who benefit, students, aren't neccesarily the ones paying for me to make an appearance. And I speak to artists individually all the time, for nothing. Anyone who has a financial problem can tell me, through this website or others, and I'll make my best effort to come up with an answer.
The problem is, not very many people are interested. In college because they don't yet have to deal with this problem, and outside, because they're already resigned to failure. There are a couple of basic tricks to economic survival, and at least for me, they've worked.

on Tuesday, April 13th, Adrian said

How to mobilise the possibility and the response-ability that artists feel towards the way in which world affairs are handled, in itself, is a cause for concern. Because many artists today, know and feel this response. Their ability, though, can get overwhelmed by financial obligations if they haven't tackled these yet. Obviously, being an artist also involves financially supporting yourself in your expression.
If artists could have their means of financial support in place, whatever that may be, then one can focus on ways of expressing that truth about what's going on in the world and how this is being interpreted, either together with their present financial means or apart from this. Getting these ideas out there, would be easier without having to necessarily attend to financial concerns...although these are 'almost' inescapable.

Art, 'not' created as means to financial survival, is a different approach to the creative impulse that is thought to come as a result of survival.

There are lots of brilliant ideas to 'voice'. To get them out, is a different story.

I would say that it be a matter of 'non-profit for non-profit'. And by this I mean the following.
There are circumstances where financial support is offered for certain projects to take place. But what if there is no access to these kind of funds because an artist doesn't qualify(within a social or academic structure) for them. How can a voice be heard, amongst the crowd, if there is no platform from where to speak? If no platform is in sight, then there's the possibility to change the 'pitch' of voice. Figuratively speaking, the artist has to take their own responsibility and find a different approach (pitch). This in itself a creative expression and as has been said, there are those who have the talent to give advice on ways to launch a different pitch to the present situation. But it is also required of those that have the ideas and practical applications on 'how' to launch such a 'pitch', to offer their services for free, i.e. If there be, and there are, artists and promotional professionals, who are willing to give advice in a non-profitable way to artists who want to express also in a non-profitable way?these two can work together. This is a form of social responsibility , where all parties concerned work together, supporting themselves through their own methods (or even collectively), but not as a means to use each other for profit.

on Monday, April 12th, hari said

best

best

on Wednesday, April 7th, Andrew said

Worse, Walt, in that what young artists believe is the truth, learned through their experience with the real world, is in fact just what everything else is...fraud. Selling anything requires the minimization of costs, and thereby quality, and a good line that may not be true, but has at least, appeal to the masses. Like sticking 'natural' on a package. The processed food product that's in there can't be found in nature. Nor do artists succeed because of their talent for art, because of their exceptional creativity, or because of their sensitivity to the social phenomena that surrounds us all. We have not recognized such people like those I mentioned, within our midst, because to do so wouldn't make sense economically. Sellers buy what's cheap to sell it again for more, and that includes art. Recognizing talent just creates problems.

on Wednesday, April 7th, Andrew said

on Tuesday, April 6th, walt said

Have we not had any Man Rays, Picasso's or Van Gogh's or have we simply not been able to recognize them...sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees. Perhaps in this case we can't see the trees because of the forest.

Art Blogs - Artblogs - Art Weblogs - absolutearts.com - wwar.com

04/05/2010: "The Revolutionary Spirit"