Connection post: Modern art was CIA 'weapon' & Propaganda and Patronage during the Cold War11/13/2015 The article, "Modern art was CIA 'weapon'" is very enlightening. It is amazing and almost terrifying to think that our thoughts and opinion towards art pieces can be manipulated by government organizations, like the CIA. I believe that the International Organizations Division (IOD) and the CIA can be seen as the modern day Medici family, who basically funded the old masters of the Renaissance. Their efforts to fund modern artists and create artwork has flourished American culture and introduced new isms to the world, such as abstract expressionism, just like the Medici family. People's habits of following trends and accepting popularized ideas presented on media can even be seen today.This reading was more intriguing but vague and less informative of the historical background. Especially this passage, "Would Abstract Expressionism have been the dominant art movement of the post-war years without this patronage? The answer is probably yes. Equally, it would be wrong to suggest that when you look at an Abstract Expressionist painting you are being duped by the CIA." was very vague. This paragraph asserted claims that Abstract Expressionism would have become popular without patronage and that the CIA did not "dupe" us. However, there is no later or even prior evidence in the article to support this very strong statement and the statement actually made me more aware and realize what the CIA had manipulated in those years.
The second piece, "Propaganda and Patronage during the Cold War," was much more specific in its evidence. It provided much more analysis from several different scholars, on the topic of propagandic Cold War art. Those individuals included the author, Jane de Hart Matthews, Cockcroft, and Craven, to name a few. Many different viewpoints were brought up for the reader and the author thoroughly argued and supported them, such as when the author stated, "Both scholars fail to find a medium in their arguments and defend extreme claims." The author thinks about what the scholars are saying and critiques it. I loved the idea how Soviet Realism was just a facade for their disdained Romanticism. The Soviet depictions of idealized peaceful communist life is essentially Romanticism because of how detrimental communism actually was to the Soviet people. This piece was definitely more analytical, thorough, and informative than the first article. I wondered how art would be if the Cold War did not facilitate the government to encourage the arts. Would there be less abstract art and more emphasis on realistic art? Would art not be as valued as they are today? How different would the museums be? It is fascinating how we can study art and see how art can reflect the histories of cultures and foreign relations of that time. It was also interesting to see how such a liberal competition in art styles happened alongside the technological space race between the Soviet Union and America.
1 Comment
Kenan Potter
11/20/2015 07:12:24 pm
I love the way you structured your essay, it works really well! Your analysis of both articles was concise and flowed nicely, it helped me organize my own thoughts on them. I especially liked how you backed many of your statements up with quotes. It was interesting to see how you (and others) approached this topic. It's nice how you posed a couple of your own questions in the end, they left me wondering too!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMaggie L. Walker Governor's School Student in Art IV. Archives
May 2017
Categories |