But The Art Will Be Great….Right?

One of the refrains I see when fascism rises (higher than it already is) and begins to sweep across—well, let's be honest here—the Republican Party……is that "at least the art will be great." Like everything else is going to suck for millions, and we might end up at war,  and probably a lot of marginalized people are going to die, but at least we'll get some good albums and novels out of it.  

But will we? 

Will we really?

Turbulent times of cultural tension can create great artistic expression. But if you're grabbing popcorn and hoping for a lit art scene, you might want to check your history books. Because you know what doesn't create artistic expression? Artists going hungry, and keeping their heads down because they might get killed.

Artists have to get paid. I don't know when the idea showed up that artists shouldn't get paid for their work. 

Actually, I do. 

It was in the early 19th century France (and late 18th in Germany) when "art for art's sake" became so absurdly en vogue. Art then became almost exclusively something done by "starving artists" (or maybe by an upper class, white, gentlemen-of-leisure type who didn't need to work or raise kids or anything) and the idea that money sullied it showed up. It wasn't that other people weren't MAKING art (and good art)…to pay the bills, it's just that the circle jerk of rich white men deciding only other rich white men were making "real" art showed up. France and Germany were two tiny European nations joining England in telling the rest of the world how to live around this time.

One of the reasons that around that time we have way too many books by landed gentry white dudes with too much time on their hands.

And like most things the power elite and monied classes do, the bourgeoisie adopted it lock, stock, and cliché so they could play at feeling like they have some modicum of power by enforcing status quos (instead of their reality of being proletarians about three or four paychecks away from destitute) and proceeded to use it to create an artificial class barrier to feel superior to people who expected to be compensated for their expertise and time. 

This idea of art for art's sake and starving genius artists endured even after art exploded in its consumption, artists became celebrities, and most began to be exploited by capitalism. 

First of all, fuck that. If you didn't pay attention in ANY humanities classes, let me give you the straight dope on this: some of the best, most endearing, most provocative art came either back in the way back when an artist had a patron making sure they were WELL taken care of so they didn't have to work some menial job that took them away from creativity or when they absolutely were doing it as a job. Not starving. Not above it all. Just like everyone else making a living. 

I shouldn't have to tell you this, but France and Germany at the height of European colonialism don't get to decide what makes for good art. They sure thought they did (particularly at the time), but they didn't. Even at the zenith of this myth about what was considered "high" art for its own sake, you can still find better art that isn't.

But also…an artist can't be creating something you find subversive if subversion will get them hurt. And I’m not trying to be alarmist, but that’s where authoritarian movements that create scapegoats in marginalized communities always wind up going—artists who don't toe the line land in prison or get dead.  These times are the LULLS in a nation's artistic expression. (Unless they're cranking out a lot of propaganda.) You might find most artists to be pretty resilient against social consequence. They don't seem to care if they upset the status quo and if you threaten them with a one-way ticket out of polite society, they're liable to ask you if they can take the express train. But when you're jailing them, disappearing them for a while, or worse for having the temerity to hold a black light to the sheets of society, you're not going to get a lot of rousing artistic discourse.

It turns out that social consequence or even oppression in the form of marginalization or cultural imperialism might embolden most artists but actually imprisoning them or worse has kind of a chilling effect on their creativity. Violence puts us in a survival and crisis mode that isn't where creativity happens.

If you really want your art to be off the hook, pay the shit out of artists and make sure that they are safe enough to feel like they're just losing social standing and their comped tickets to BRESH instead of their homes, their livelihood, their freedom, and possibly their lives.

And on that note, here's my patreon if you're looking for an artist to support.