Notes on Art Production :D
"sorry for my whacky messages lately. i was drawing. :D"
This gives a chance to talk about art production; MIM made clear at most two years ago that front line cultural workers must be given the freedom to experiment and express without censorship. This is because all persons have thousands of experiences and are trying to express those experience to thousands, millions or even billions of people. Errors in line, even cardinal errors, are bound to pop up since no person is 100% correct 100% of the time. So the role of the party is to weed through the 100 flowers to uproot those weeds and also to nurture the flowers. ALso it is very important to help the artist to understand their line errors after the production of the work, not to stifle their production of art but to control the dissemination of their art and to use the dissemination as a reward for art that is progressive and the non-dissemination as a punishment.
The bourgeois have a tactical advantage here because they have the myth of the separation of "form" and "content". They can claim to any artist under criticism that their error is one of "form" not "substance" and that they just need to change their "form" to put out the right content (i.e. the bourgeoisie elitist individualist greed driven wargasm machine).
We in contrast must develop the ability to "make the old serve the new", to make foreign things serve the proletariat. We have a tactically tougher task because our line is strategically correct. All the imperialists little wins tactically get swept away in our big win strategically.
Our criticism should just about never be directed to "style": that would just be repeating the bourgeois bullshit "form/content" split. The medium IS the message.
Further, there are thousands of styles any of which can be used to convey the Maoist message.
A common critique of Stalinist era art is that socialist realism is somehow stultifying and limited. That critique is invalid. However, a valid critique could be made, that socialist realism became the only style.
Mao's hundred flowers campaign specifically repudiated the "one style fits all" approach and encouraged ALL forms of art. Even traditionally reactionary styles such as woodcuts and calligraphy with out-size brushes were permitted provided they carried the Maoist message. And such art did exist and can be found. Ballet, for example, is traditionally the most reactionary of arts, reinforcing the idea of fixed gender roles and in the USSR became one tool of "peaceful coexistence" of the integration of Soviet Social Imperialism into the global imperialist order. Yet, Comrade Jiang Qing (Chiang Ching) was able to use the reactionary form progressively.
For the obvious reason that the party is in an ugly security situation no form of censorship has or could have been implemented in the past year.
Your Minister's line can be criticized for being overly liberal, for being willing to tolerate most anything: "run it up the flagpole and see who salutes". However, Your Minister's pornified anti-war line is clearly gathering viewers. At some point those viewers will be able to be transformed into art producers and to take up anti-war and pro-Maoist lines. To inspire and encourage art producers is a current realizable goal of this ministry. To transform passive viewers into active Maoists (party building) is currently not possible but is a goal that could be attained, and that I think should be attained, within five years.
At that point, when we move to transforming our viewers from passive opponents fighting against imperialist wars into active supporters of Maoism then a system of censorship may be needed. My own approach, at that point, would be liberal. Just like the state tolerated "Anything but Stalin" I would argue we should tolerate in artistic production "Anything but fascism" and to actively attack fascists using art as this Ministry has been doing. That is the line I am implementing through my practice of artistic production is also the line I would want to see implemented when the security situation changes. In doubt we should not censor and censorship should consist only of "no public showings". Art of the most reactionary kind could continue to be produced by individuals but would be never shown publicly. Rather evil art would be archived in museums to be made the object of ridicule or as historical notes to future generations.
Artistically another defence of my line is that youtube has censored (removed) several videos showing dead imperialists. The imperialists cannot bear to see the truth that their wars are suicidal. However they are more vulnerable to sugar colored bullets. So the whores not wars line is tactically superior both in gathering viewers and in not being censored by the enemy.
This gives a chance to talk about art production; MIM made clear at most two years ago that front line cultural workers must be given the freedom to experiment and express without censorship. This is because all persons have thousands of experiences and are trying to express those experience to thousands, millions or even billions of people. Errors in line, even cardinal errors, are bound to pop up since no person is 100% correct 100% of the time. So the role of the party is to weed through the 100 flowers to uproot those weeds and also to nurture the flowers. ALso it is very important to help the artist to understand their line errors after the production of the work, not to stifle their production of art but to control the dissemination of their art and to use the dissemination as a reward for art that is progressive and the non-dissemination as a punishment.
The bourgeois have a tactical advantage here because they have the myth of the separation of "form" and "content". They can claim to any artist under criticism that their error is one of "form" not "substance" and that they just need to change their "form" to put out the right content (i.e. the bourgeoisie elitist individualist greed driven wargasm machine).
We in contrast must develop the ability to "make the old serve the new", to make foreign things serve the proletariat. We have a tactically tougher task because our line is strategically correct. All the imperialists little wins tactically get swept away in our big win strategically.
Our criticism should just about never be directed to "style": that would just be repeating the bourgeois bullshit "form/content" split. The medium IS the message.
Further, there are thousands of styles any of which can be used to convey the Maoist message.
A common critique of Stalinist era art is that socialist realism is somehow stultifying and limited. That critique is invalid. However, a valid critique could be made, that socialist realism became the only style.
Mao's hundred flowers campaign specifically repudiated the "one style fits all" approach and encouraged ALL forms of art. Even traditionally reactionary styles such as woodcuts and calligraphy with out-size brushes were permitted provided they carried the Maoist message. And such art did exist and can be found. Ballet, for example, is traditionally the most reactionary of arts, reinforcing the idea of fixed gender roles and in the USSR became one tool of "peaceful coexistence" of the integration of Soviet Social Imperialism into the global imperialist order. Yet, Comrade Jiang Qing (Chiang Ching) was able to use the reactionary form progressively.
For the obvious reason that the party is in an ugly security situation no form of censorship has or could have been implemented in the past year.
Your Minister's line can be criticized for being overly liberal, for being willing to tolerate most anything: "run it up the flagpole and see who salutes". However, Your Minister's pornified anti-war line is clearly gathering viewers. At some point those viewers will be able to be transformed into art producers and to take up anti-war and pro-Maoist lines. To inspire and encourage art producers is a current realizable goal of this ministry. To transform passive viewers into active Maoists (party building) is currently not possible but is a goal that could be attained, and that I think should be attained, within five years.
At that point, when we move to transforming our viewers from passive opponents fighting against imperialist wars into active supporters of Maoism then a system of censorship may be needed. My own approach, at that point, would be liberal. Just like the state tolerated "Anything but Stalin" I would argue we should tolerate in artistic production "Anything but fascism" and to actively attack fascists using art as this Ministry has been doing. That is the line I am implementing through my practice of artistic production is also the line I would want to see implemented when the security situation changes. In doubt we should not censor and censorship should consist only of "no public showings". Art of the most reactionary kind could continue to be produced by individuals but would be never shown publicly. Rather evil art would be archived in museums to be made the object of ridicule or as historical notes to future generations.
Artistically another defence of my line is that youtube has censored (removed) several videos showing dead imperialists. The imperialists cannot bear to see the truth that their wars are suicidal. However they are more vulnerable to sugar colored bullets. So the whores not wars line is tactically superior both in gathering viewers and in not being censored by the enemy.
posted by Maoist Internationalist Movement at 4:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home