Tag urself. I’m MOCKS THE CONCEPT OF VALUES
https://twitter.com/oldbooksguy/status/1695775948569018481?t=b5YxtrzSkxNBP659ywCYyg&s=19
Tag urself. I’m MOCKS THE CONCEPT OF VALUES
https://twitter.com/oldbooksguy/status/1695775948569018481?t=b5YxtrzSkxNBP659ywCYyg&s=19
The only real difference between good art and bad art, if there is such a distinction, is whether the art is revolutionary or reactionary. Art that serves revolutionary politics is good while art that wallows in some reactionary nonsense is bad. It’s quite telling that values has to either be hinted at or mocked, leaving little room for openly politicized art. Could it be that this loser has reactionary ideas but understands that those reactionary ideas can’t be openly expressed so they must be hinted at?
Nah, great art transcends the binary of revolutionary or reactionary
One could argue that great art has to have some level of creativity. And thus by deffinition cant be reactionary.
Even if a reactionary makes good art. The art has to have creativity in that sense the art is no longer reactionary.