View Poll Results: Should "degenerate" art be banned, in your opinion?

Voters
115. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it should be banned.

    43 37.39%
  • No, it shouldn't be banned.

    56 48.70%
  • Other opinion/I want to see the votes.

    16 13.91%
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2789101112
Results 111 to 120 of 120

Thread: Should "Degenerate Art" Be Banned?

  1. #111
    Senior Member Skärmträl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Online
    12 Hours Ago @ 01:50 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Gender
    Posts
    131
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    107
    Thanked in
    70 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    Art was conceived to supersede suffering, not enable it. It should always be uplifting and ennobling.
    My point was not that art should enable suffering. In many cases I think people enjoy art of any kind because it acknowledges our experience (we recognize our lives in it) and then turn it into a learning experience, and then maybe, as you say, uplifts it or ennobles it.

    Scolding, threats, beatings, etc. do not inspire virtue. Virtue which rises out of fear and pedantic preaching merely reinforces egoism and increases contempt for the Christian religion. Schopenhauer and Voltaire have said as much.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDSpkQ8U2Hs#t=1m26s

    A fuzzy little rabbit is obviously more relatable and helps cultivate an appreciation for wildlife and biology. The fables of Aesop (which even Luther acknowledged) have more merit than that of Homer's, opting to omit the monstrous sensationalism and prevailing superstitions of his times strictly for sound ethics
    Good for youngsters, I'm sure, but once we've grown up, reading Aesop (and the like) gets pretty effing dull. As adults, we can handle fear to a larger degree, and facing our fears is important for personal development. Of course, the scary element needs to be placed at some distance, we need to be in an otherwise safe environment in order to experience the sublime (yes, Burke). We need that balance, I think. We could even call it the Dionysian/Apollonian aspect to cover early Nietzsche as well.

    It is almost entirely devoid of form and prizes color.
    Art which goes beyond the figurative in order to play around with the abstract seems rather obsessed with form and its possibilities. If we stick with Kant, modern art seems more keen on exploring design than traditional art, not less.

  2. #112
    Senior Member Sigurdsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Last Online
    22 Hours Ago @ 03:38 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Ancestry
    England & Norway
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Canada Canada
    Gender
    Age
    20
    Zodiac Sign
    Taurus
    Politics
    Traditon, Monarchy, Patriotism
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    154
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    31
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    54 Posts
    No. But clearly classical art and art with purpose or passion should be praised much more than the “degenerate art”.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Sigurdsson For This Useful Post:


  4. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    10 Hours Ago @ 04:10 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Religion
    Hitlerism
    Posts
    285
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    46
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    85
    Thanked in
    62 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigebrond View Post
    Under the assumption that it excludes art that's promoting paedophilia, bestiality, LGBT crap and so on, no, I am against censorship and regardless of how inept and tasteless modern art might seem, we should be the adults in the situation and put up with it.
    That sounds pacifistic to me. Pacifism means putting up with all kinds of unreasonable living conditions and demands in order to avoid upsetting the delicate sensitivities of others and disrupting the status quo.

    Adults don't look the other way. Art is a divine sphere, it's not the same issue as people practicing homosexuality in their private lives far away from the public eye.

    Jewish actors can get away with what they do, I appreciate them as much, but I can't say the same for Jewish filmmakers. The latter bears the greater responsibility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skärmträl View Post
    My point was not that art should enable suffering. In many cases I think people enjoy art of any kind because it acknowledges our experience (we recognize our lives in it) and then turn it into a learning experience, and then maybe, as you say, uplifts it or ennobles it.
    Art isn't supposed to mirror or conform to our daily lives. It also isn't meant to replicate nature, but surpass it (i.e. Goethe's assessment of Rubens' paintings).

    Quote Originally Posted by Skärmträl View Post
    Good for youngsters, I'm sure, but once we've grown up, reading Aesop (and the like) gets pretty effing dull. As adults, we can handle fear to a larger degree, and facing our fears is important for personal development. Of course, the scary element needs to be placed at some distance, we need to be in an otherwise safe environment in order to experience the sublime (yes, Burke). We need that balance, I think. We could even call it the Dionysian/Apollonian aspect to cover early Nietzsche as well.
    I never tired of reading the Greek myths, even if they were monstrously distorted.

    Adults are still behaving like children. They stop learning when they graduate, very few will change their mind after they've settled on a comfortable view of life. No one has the right to call himself an adult until he has acquired a sense of proportion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skärmträl View Post
    Art which goes beyond the figurative in order to play around with the abstract seems rather obsessed with form and its possibilities. If we stick with Kant, modern art seems more keen on exploring design than traditional art, not less.
    You call that form? Also, you haven't addressed it's obsession with color.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigebrond View Post
    No more book burnings or "bonfire of the vanities", when you start burning books and art deemed inappropriate or unacceptable, eventually the definition of what is acceptable is going to become increasingly narrow.
    Even a great man like Plato considered going through with burning all of Democritus' books, foreseeing the disastrous consequences of one-sided materialism.

    Although you may have a point about the definition becoming arbitrary.

  5. #114
    Senior Member Skärmträl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Online
    12 Hours Ago @ 01:50 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Gender
    Posts
    131
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    107
    Thanked in
    70 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    Art isn't supposed to mirror or conform to our daily lives.
    You speak of art as though it's some sort of alien force. Surely, art must mirror human experience somehow?

    Adults are still behaving like children. They stop learning when they graduate, very few will change their mind after they've settled on a comfortable view of life. No one has the right to call himself an adult until he has acquired a sense of proportion.
    But we don't stop learning about life after school, do we? Adults are sooner or later forced to confront that pesky thing beyond any harmonious proportions called life, and the aspects of adult life which art (and religion) seems the most keen on depicting are the great emotional human inevitabilities e.g. love, death, sadness and joy.

    You call that form?
    Certainly. Beyond recognition, but nevertheless form.

    Also, you haven't addressed it's obsession with color.
    Well, what about it? You sound as though you've made an argument for or against that color-use, but I can't find any such thing in your posts.

  6. #115
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    41 Minutes Ago @ 01:32 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    764
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    896
    Thanked in
    369 Posts
    Hm, imho one should seperate the question of degeneracy from the question whether something is "art" or not. These don't correlate necessarily, as the examples of actual great artworks showing very ugly humans on page 11 demonstrate. That the depicted thing is ugly does not take away anything from the artwork's great execution and demonstration of skill.

    Every artwork is intended to send a message, and it's this message what the question of degenerate art is all about. Looking merely at the outer appearance or what is depicted does not necessarily help to decipher that message, what it is intended to promote.

    The "geometric" art f.e. were not considered degenerate because of the rather abstract forms, but because they actually intented to promote a "broken" view and perception, Edvard Munch's The Scream (Der Schrei) for its "deranged" portrayal (apart from that one also begs the question whether it is "art" at all) as well. It is the thread that connects all Jewish art, it promotes deranged and broken views and perceptions, the forced atomization of the self, the seperateability of aspects of the self. Jews are so used to play roles that they probably really dont have a whole self anymore, and the ideologies they brought forth (talmudism, christianity, communism, gendermainstreaming etc) all have in common that they intend to split the whole human apart, force it into roles and through that, generate intertia and the inability to act because these roles can even force one into oxymoronic positions. At the end apathy and confusion prevails.

    This of course was not wanted anymore. Art was supposed to support the development of the Aryan soul and wanted ideals, instead of all vices possible (and impossible) that dominated the communist 20s. Basically, this move to label certain "art" degenerate was part of the strategy to "stamp out the Jewish spirit". It was not about the question whether something is art or not, it was about what was promoted through art/"art".

    Of course, if we ever manage to recreate an ideology-run nation for ourselves, every good leader would do exactly that again and remove unwanted promotion from public display, and instead promote depictions and art that are supportive of the general ideology. That laissez-faire view of everything goes is what brought us here in the first place. Or as Nietzsche said it: tolerance is the absense of trust in one's own values, or even the absense of values.

    Besides publicy promoted art, architecture what have you, there will be always subcultures, underground or special interest arts that can well exist beside it, and there isnt a problem with that as long as this grows from the respective Volk of a nation, and doesnt promote against this Volk. And under that circumstances, art should indeed be free.

    But as said, the original idea of "degenerate art" was part of the fight against a foreign, hostile virus that had befallen our nation, and in this context this must be viewed. It was not about "art" as such, or whether something is art or not.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  8. #116
    Anachronism "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    2,953
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    480
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    608
    Thanked in
    287 Posts
    I must say that, with respect to Munch and his paintings, that he was not in fact a Jew. He was a Norwegian who was rather a disturbed individual. Twisted visages like "The Scream" are not, in fact, Jewish at all, rather, they are distorted, or perhaps oversensitive perceptions of a dark reality.

    The real problem (and this is where the Jew comes in) is that such fringe horrors are PROMOTED into the mainstream of the art world. The money that drives this world comes from and is directed by (((you know who.))) It is the same principle mainstream media uses... talk about what drives the agenda and neglect the rest. In the case of art, their agenda is indeed the destruction of the soul and the demoralization of the folk body as a whole.

    If you talk about the "art" that emanates from Jews themselves, it is almost universally mediocre and without soul in any direction. One thing many have noticed is how utterly bad season 8 of Game of Thrones was... just a bunch of soulless narrative to tie up loose ends. Well, the reason is that this season was written not by the author of the books, but by the Jewish producers. The term "kitsch" is a perfect one for Jewish "art."
    Most people think as they are trained to think, and most people make a majority.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Huginn ok Muninn For This Useful Post:


  10. #117
    Senior Member Sigebrond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Last Online
    4 Hours Ago @ 09:17 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English/British, part Irish
    Country
    England England
    State
    Sussex Sussex
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    warehouse work, arts and crafts
    Politics
    Tribalism, Anarcho-Primitivism
    Religion
    Traditionalist Pagan/heathen
    Posts
    138
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    35
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    50 Posts
    It is also worth stressing that the Third Reich oppressed and otherwise impeded the careers of many really talented and healthy artists, because all they were interested in really was samey, generic, classical art. Fidus was very supportive of Hitler and his ideology, and was an incredibly talented artist who really stood out in that whole Volkisch movement, and undoubtedly influenced "hippie" art of the 60s, but his career was ended by the Nazis:

    (from wiki) "After 1918, interest in Fidus’ work as an illustrator ebbed. Despite his enthusiasm for the ideology of the Nazi Party, of which he became a member in 1932, he did not receive the support of the Nazi regime. In 1937 his work was seized and the sale of his images was forbidden. By the time he died in 1948 in Woltersdorf his art had been almost forgotten. It was rediscovered in the 1960s, and directly influenced the psychedelic concert posters which began to be produced at that time, initially in and around San Francisco."

    Even good artists that support our ideas can fall victim to totalitarian campaigns against art considered distasteful. I think even Gust Klimt may have been classed as "degenerate art" as well.

  11. #118
    Senior Member Skärmträl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Online
    12 Hours Ago @ 01:50 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Gender
    Posts
    131
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    107
    Thanked in
    70 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Huginn ok Muninn View Post
    If you talk about the "art" that emanates from Jews themselves, it is almost universally mediocre
    You say "almost"; what are some examples of good Jewish art?

  12. #119
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    10 Hours Ago @ 04:10 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Religion
    Hitlerism
    Posts
    285
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    46
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    85
    Thanked in
    62 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    But as said, the original idea of "degenerate art" was part of the fight against a foreign, hostile virus that had befallen our nation, and in this context this must be viewed. It was not about "art" as such, or whether something is art or not.
    Thanks for the reminder, and this covers but one aspect of the overall fight, but then why did Hitler say he had given German greatness a cultural foundation? In speeches, he said art was not a fashion and that art was a mainstay of the people. It was clearly about restoring dignity to art. He even regarded art as one of the few spheres where Jews had exhibited no creativity whatsoever, namely architecture and music.

    In Wagener's memoirs, Hitler affirms design (being formed by the perfect lines), puts color into the background (praising their contrasting interplay), and praises the realism and tangibility of the works from great artists (being featured at the museums Pinakothek and Glypothek) in contrast to the misshapen figures and blobs of unrelated colors in degenerate art.

    Then he goes on to describe a painting entitled ‘Metropolis’ and declares that "that sort of thing bears no relation to art", hence he was interested in classifying whether something could be considered art or not.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigebrond View Post
    It is also worth stressing that the Third Reich oppressed and otherwise impeded the careers of many really talented and healthy artists, because all they were interested in really was samey, generic, classical art.
    "Healthy" That's debatable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigebrond View Post
    Fidus was very supportive of Hitler and his ideology, and was an incredibly talented artist who really stood out in that whole Volkisch movement, and undoubtedly influenced "hippie" art of the 60s, but his career was ended by the Nazis:

    (from wiki) "After 1918, interest in Fidus’ work as an illustrator ebbed. Despite his enthusiasm for the ideology of the Nazi Party, of which he became a member in 1932, he did not receive the support of the Nazi regime. In 1937 his work was seized and the sale of his images was forbidden. By the time he died in 1948 in Woltersdorf his art had been almost forgotten. It was rediscovered in the 1960s, and directly influenced the psychedelic concert posters which began to be produced at that time, initially in and around San Francisco."
    His art practically caricatures the men who took part in the NSDAP rallies featured on Riefenstahl's film.

    Also from the wiki: "Membership in the Nazi Party did not protect Emil Nolde, whose 1912 woodcut The Prophet is shown here. 1052 of Nolde's paintings were removed from German museums, more than any other artist."

    Sounds like these individuals were being opportunistic, attempting to salvage their works by being admitted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigebrond View Post
    I think even Gust Klimt may have been classed as "degenerate art" as well.
    They were on point with that one. Fidus' works are mild in comparison.

  13. #120
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    41 Minutes Ago @ 01:32 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    764
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    896
    Thanked in
    369 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    why did Hitler say he had given German greatness a cultural foundation
    ...hence he was interested in classifying whether something could be considered art or not.
    Well, we can well discuss the details of Hitler's own confusion of what is "German", see his obsession with Roman architecture and aesthetics, he became quite obsessed with subplanting German expression with a Roman foundation. Imho, the 1937 exhibition already shows how Hitler went way too far, starting to sort out indeed German artists not complying to his very narrow view in that respect. While Himmler really wanted to recreate "German" culture, art, architecture etc, Hitler was obsessed with everything Roman and made fun of Himmler (notwithstanding the fact that Himmler still had unlimited resources and free hand to do as he saw fit), even though Rosenberg had watered down his original idea to that what he wrote down in Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts, he still received no "approval" and so on. There were good reasons for Stauffenberg to try to stop Hitler at some point, but that's an entirely different discussion.

    In essense, however, from the basic idea, he was right to remove foreign and/or "undesireable" art from public display, and to a degree, one must assess whether something is "art" to begin with or not. While, say, comic strips or cartoons require certain skills and can have a meaning or even "speak to people", are they art in the sense of "art"? Should they be regarded as art, or are they "merely" craftmenship? What makes art "art"?

    Imho, the latter question is much more difficult to answer.

    The overabundance of colour is no criteria, imho. Everyday furniture looked like this until around 1900 and even beyond:


    Hitler would have called that Kitch or probably even degenerate because of its motley appearance, but in fact this was common in everyone's house, it was cultural expression. It is not "our" culture to reduce everything to only "clear" lines, and when the play-y, curvy, motley "kitch" went out of "fashion", we ended up with Jugendstil, which was still play-y, curvy, motley, but a bit less so than before. This obsession with "reduced" or even removed style and replacement with "useability" or reduction to function alone is a fairly recent phenomenon.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2789101112

Similar Threads

  1. "Racist" Car Banned From Appearance At NASCAR Race
    By Verðandi in forum Sports, Leisure & Hobbies
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, March 8th, 2012, 07:29 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 05:40 PM
  3. "Zahra's Blue Eyes": Banned ‘anti-semitic’ masterpiece returns!
    By Aistulf in forum Film, TV, & Performing Arts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sunday, September 24th, 2006, 05:08 PM
  4. Degenerate Art Exhibition, Munich 1937
    By Nordgau in forum Visual Arts & Aesthetics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Monday, October 11th, 2004, 04:45 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •