Your opinion on:

[Omsk]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004814/Is-bird-Is-plane-No-Superman-friends-painted-Soviet-statue-Banksy-Bulgaria.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

..This is just sad..

[Revy]

Why not give a reason why you think it is sad?

[Jimmie Higgins]

Shouldn't this be in Art rather than Politics?

"Moving with the times". I think it's an interesting comment. I think you can even interpret that in a pro-M-L way too if what's making you sad is that you think it's defacing a M-L monument.

Or you can interpret it as the times moved and the ruling class glorifies capitalist myths now instead of Stalinist ones :D

[Omsk]

Why not give a reason why you think it is sad?

Such a desecration of a monument is simply horrible,and sad,as if they suddenly forgot about everything that happened..Not to mention that that is a monument to the War and,by definition,to the many Soviet soldiers who died in the war.It's as if someone spat on their graves.


Or you can interpret it as the times moved and the ruling class glorifies capitalist myths now instead of Stalinist ones

It's not a "Stalinist" myth,its a monument to the soldiers who died in the war,and as such,it should be regarded as something worth perserving,no matter how much time passed from the end of WW2.

[ZeroNowhere]

It's pretty well done, I must say.

[danyboy27]

Such a desecration of a monument is simply horrible,and sad,as if they suddenly forgot about everything that happened..Not to mention that that is a monument to the War and,by definition,to the many Soviet soldiers who died in the war.It's as if someone spat on their graves.



It's not a "Stalinist" myth,its a monument to the soldiers who died in the war,and as such,it should be regarded as something worth perserving,no matter how much time passed from the end of WW2.

Well, Personally i think its almost an honor to compare those soviet war heroes to those badass comics superheroes.

i mean, they kicked ass, that for sure.

[Thirsty Crow]

It's pretty well done, I must say.
Not only that, but I'd say that it has a critical potential inasmuch as there is an interesting interpretative ambiguity to be discerned here:

1) sure, on one hand one can "read" this "defacing" as a celebration of liberal democracy and restructured capitalism in Bulgaria, but the subscription, "moving with the times", can on the other hand be read as far too neutral a sign, lacking in connotations of euphoria or celebration. This leads to a possible second "reading"

2) neutral or nostalgic recording of the social transformation, but significantly tinted with irony which bears a potential of a critique - instead of a representation of "ordinary" people in extraordinary situations, this "defacing" represents a sort of a changing of places: fictive characters replace "ordinary" people as agents of historical action

@ComradeE.: Why do you hold such a rigid, quasi-religious attitude towards these kind of works of art (the original sculptures)?

[Omsk]

@ComradeE.: Why do you hold such a rigid, quasi-religious attitude towards these kind of works of art (the original sculptures)?
Segments of history captured in stone (or whatever material the monument is made of),plus,if the theme of the monument is important and involves national history,(War,devastation,liberation,revolution,etc ) than the monuments should be kept intact and protected.

[Thirsty Crow]

Segments of history captured in stone (or whatever material the monument is made of),plus,if the theme of the monument is important and involves national history,(War,devastation,liberation,revolution,etc ) than the monuments should be kept intact and protected.
They are intact, and that cannot be said about a good number of similar monuments in the Balkans where they've been blown up or partially destroyed.
Don't you see a difference here? This act of "creative defacing" did not in fact erase the original, or its message/significance.

[Jimmie Higgins]

It's not a "Stalinist" myth,its a monument to the soldiers who died in the warI was only offering one possible interpretation, like I said it can also be seen as a M-L comment about the worship of "real heroes" being replaced by the myths of comic book heroes and corporate icons.


and as such,it should be regarded as something worth perserving,no matter how much time passed from the end of WW2.[/QUOTE]

Would you say the same about US monuments about WWII because I don't think they are worth preserving... maybe in a museum of capitalist-era art after the revolution for historical reasons... but as a public monument, no. The US tries to also sell WWII as "the people's war" when it was really a war among powers for dominance. Where's the monument to the Warsaw Ghetto uprising or all the German radicals who fought the Freikorps and NAZIs in the streets if the US really thinks that fighting NAZIs is such an important principle?

No, I don't think nationalist propaganda is worthy of public art.

[Omsk]

The US tries to also sell WWII as "the people's war" when it was really a war among powers for dominance.

Sorry,but to people in East Europe and the Balkans,it was a war of survival.Though i guess the situation is different in America.


They are intact, and that cannot be said about a good number of similar monuments in the Balkans where they've been blown up or partially destroyed.
Don't you see a difference here? This act of "creative defacing" did not in fact erase the original, or its message/significance.

But it could still be done on a wall,or on a painting sheet,a copy of the monument could be drawn and the soldiers replaced by Superman,or Batman or whatnot.No need to do such a thing on a monument.

[magicme]

I agree, I think it's sad, but it was pretty creative. Though it's better than someone destroying the thing I'd prefer it if people left historical monuments alone. My concern with defacing war monuments would mainly be that it'd upset people connected to the events remembered there, doesn't seem any need to mess with old people like that just to make an artistic point. Also I think it's cool to preserve the past as people in the past portrayed it, it's of historical interest.

The artist might have Marvel and DC comics chasing him for breaking their copyrights now, I hear they don't mess around and like to keep lawyers busy. The most offensive thing I found in the Daily Mail article was the use of quotes around the 'liberation' of Bulgaria. They still haven't got over the failure of the Blackshirts that paper supported in the 30s apparently. It was definitely a liberation for Bulgaria's 50,000 Jews.

[Red Future]

Having seen it ..its fucking disgusting

[Jimmie Higgins]

Sorry,but to people in East Europe and the Balkans,it was a war of survival.Though i guess the situation is different in America.Yes of course the effects of the war were different for people in parts of Europe compared to places that weren't being attacked, that's not my argument. Being under attack does not change the nature of the monument which like all war monuments in class societies tried to tie the sacrifice and suffering of the people to some just cause and unite people behind their rulers.

[piet11111]

I do not like how these are all pro-capitalist "hero's" also the McDonalds guy WTF ?

The monument in and of itself is still intact and only needs to be cleaned though i can see how it can be offensive to see a soldiers memorial turned into this.
This could not have happened in the USA without the artist being chased by a lynchmob for vandalizing their memorial.

[Pretty Flaco]

I do not like how these are all pro-capitalist "hero's" also the McDonalds guy WTF ?

The monument in and of itself is still intact and only needs to be cleaned though i can see how it can be offensive to see a soldiers memorial turned into this.
This could not have happened in the USA without the artist being chased by a lynchmob for vandalizing their memorial.

i dunno about that. we deface shit all the time around here. :lol:

[Q]

I think it's brilliant. I like the cynical undertone a lot.

[Martin Blank]

This is why I hate postmodernists, even when they have a modicum of talent. Some petty-bourgeois liberal might get a kick out of seeing Superman, Santa Claus and Ronald McDonald superimposed over Soviet Army soldiers, but I don't. It's in poor taste and makes me want to slap the taste out of that "artist's" mouth.

[Q]

This is why I hate postmodernists, even when they have a modicum of talent. Some petty-bourgeois liberal might get a kick out of seeing Superman, Santa Claus and Ronald McDonald superimposed over Soviet Army soldiers, but I don't. It's in poor taste and makes me want to slap the taste out of that "artist's" mouth.

As Menocchio already explained well I think, this has to be seen in a social context. This monument everyone is so venerating about was probably never respected by the local population in the first place. Indeed "moving with the times" expresses a hate, first against the Stalinist state, and now against the capitalist hegemony. The joke is really on everyone that is so appalled on this "desecration".

This is true social critical art.

[El Oso Rojo]

Where can we find this motherfucker?

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

Fuck who ever did that.
Its a statue to goddamned heros.
it would be like doing that to the iwo jima memorial

[Q]

Fuck who ever did that.
Its a statue to goddamned heros.
it would be like doing that to the iwo jima memorial

Yes, I would very much like to see that one! Make the American flag to be a big dollar note :lol:

[Os Cangaceiros]

who cares. it's just a goddamn statue.

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

who cares. it's just a goddamn statue.

And Karl Marx is just a random author. Really you should care.

[Os Cangaceiros]

And Karl Marx is just a random author. Really you should care.

If they made a giant statue out of Karl Marx, I wouldn't care either. Stick a big red clown nose on him and stick feathers in his bronze behind...doesn't make any difference to me.

[Martin Blank]

As Menocchio already explained well I think, this has to be seen in a social context. This monument everyone is so venerating about was probably never respected by the local population in the first place. Indeed "moving with the times" expresses a hate, first against the Stalinist state, and now against the capitalist hegemony. The joke is really on everyone that is so appalled on this "desecration".

This is true social critical art.

I was writing a long response dealing with a couple specific points, but I deliberately deleted it. It seemed pointless to go into detail about why that monument, among all those erected in the Soviet era, is still standing after 20 years, and how that goes against any thought of a wider "hate" against its existence.

I think that what this comes down to for me is not what you're thinking. It's not about Stalinism; it's about something larger. The post-modernist period, which really came into its own around the same time as the collapse of the USSR and the "people's democracies", has predicated itself in many ways on a belief that there is no more history (or, as Francis Fukuyama put it, the "end of history"). For the last 20 years, this myth has become one of the greatest cultural obstacles for human society. This idea that history no longer matters, or is just as much a commodity as any other, has helped to make any sustainable anti-capitalist movement difficult, if not impossible. Everything has to be packaged and marketed -- and repeatedly re-packaged and re-marketed -- as "new" and "different", even if it is the same thing it's been for generations.

And these days, this anti-historicism has become a mass phenomenon. In modern capitalism, "history" is a matter of minutes, not events. People have to have mobile phones with cameras, video and connection to the social network of choice in order to be able to wax nostalgic about something that happened yesterday. The longer view of history is for "history geeks" or "politicians", but not for average people. People still believe they can make history, but their conception of what that means has fundamentally changed -- the vision is myopic; the expectations are at a minimum.

When I see this vandalism, I see it as a testament to anti-historicism. Everything is reduced to icons and commodities. History is cast into oblivion and what remains are passed off as "social critique".

In this sense, as well, this vandalism gives off a very defeatist message: the world never changes, only our masters. That's what I see in the statement "moving with the times". We've moved from one set of masters (the "Communists") to another (the capitalists), and nothing's really changed. And let's not forget that, in the anti-communism of the current period, there is no effort (except by people like us) to distinguish between different trends that call themselves communists. So, if communism is rejected and capitalism is increasingly rejected, where do we go? For these anti-historicists, the answer is nowhere. The world never changes, only our masters. All we can do is accept the world the way it is and try to make little changes to make our conditions more tolerable.

This is why "Banksy of Bulgaria" is pissing me off. I see "BoB's" message as incredibly reactionary, anti-historical and defeatist garbage.

Besides, it really is in poor taste. IIRC, many of these super-sized monuments often double as mass crypts for unknown soldiers killed in combat. "BoB's" vandalism strikes me as being on about the same level as desecrating headstones in a cemetery.

[ZeroNowhere]

who cares. it's just a goddamn statue.And Karl Marx is just a random author. Really you should care.You are absurd.

[∞]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8241&stc=1&d=1308729365


Tankies will be butthurt.

[PhoenixAsh]

I think its really well done...and its inventive. But it is in extremely poor taste and it is an indication of something fundamentally flawed in our societies these days....the idea that memory is something which does not have its place and can be altered and tampered with. I had not linked this to anti-historicism when I saw this. But Uncle Sam I think expressed very well what is going on here; linking it in a wider vision of the Fukuyama cult.

This is not some monument to some guy or gal who did something important or wrote a book or had a vision. This is a symbol of a great struggle, a memory for those who fought in it and essentially were willing to give their lives to oppose a great evil. Desecrating those monuments, indeed reminiscent of grave desecration, is forgetting the importance and value of that struggle and trivialises it to mere cheap entertainment...something which has no value and which does not need to be remembered.

Now...personally I don't care if your dress up a statue of Lenin, Marx....or some royal idiot on a horse. You may not like it. You may not agree with that...its just my opinion. Because in the end these statues represent nothing else but rememberencde and reverence of that single person. But these kind of monuments have a greater significance. And that significance is being forgotten and trivialised.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I wouldn't draw too wide of a conclusion about this. Kids were scribbling on and defacing portraits of Stalin before Francis Fukuyama was even a twinkle in his mother's eye. It's the same tendency that led the Edelweiss Pirates to thumb their noses at the reverence for national socialism, or bored metalheads to torch ancient churches in Scandanavia. Some people just have no reverence for dusty monuments, honored traditions or sacred cows (which, honestly, are very tasty). This particular vandal just happened to tack on a crass (but accurate) comment to his work.

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

You are absurd.

Only on Tuesday's
Seriously monuments are like photos. If it where a picture of your long dead father, I believe you would care

If I am absurd, then your ignorant

[Leonid Brozhnev]

Having been to Bulgaria recently and seen a vast amount of white nationalist graffiti, symbols, slogans and swastikas, this kind of graffiti comes as a welcome relief.

[Old Mole]

I think this a great piece of "art", utterly tasteless and with a hilarious message. Monuments are made by powerful people to signify power, thus all monuments are made to be defaced. Really, some of you people remind me of the bourgeois that complained about the damages and destructions of monuments and historical sights during the Paris commune while thousands of parisians were being shot and imprisoned by the reactionarys. Every day 18 000 kids die of starvation all over the world and you have the nerve to complain about the vandalization of some "great stalinist cultural heritage"???

[Spawn of Stalin]

Bullshit article, I'd love to see how the Daily Mail would react if the monument had been for British soldiers who fought in that war. And for what it's worth I would be equally disgusted if somebody defaced a Brit monument, this has nothing to do with politics, if you want to make a dumb statement go deface Marx or Lenin. Perhaps there is an argument to be made in favour of this sort of thing, social commentaries a la Banksy, but does it really need to be done at the expense of people who died to save everybody in Europe's lives from the Nazis? Or are all monuments fair game as long as they were built by "tyrannical" regimes.


But after the smashing of the Berlin Wall, statues celebrating communist rule appear to be fair game to the graffiti artists of the former Soviet block in Eastern Europe
But the monument doesn't really celebrate Communist rule in a way that a statue of Lenin or Stalin would. Monuments like these in my view act like graves for soldiers who never had real funerals.

The giant monument was built to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Russian 'liberation' of Bulgaria in 1944.
Oh fuck off with you quotation marks Daily Mail.

And to the people saying it's well done, all I can say is.....really? It's sloppy, the colours of the Superman logo are the wrong way around, and his belt is supposed to be yellow.

[Spawn of Stalin]

I think this a great piece of "art", utterly tasteless and with a hilarious message. Monuments are made by powerful people to signify power, thus all monuments are made to be defaced. Really, some of you people remind me of the bourgeois that complained about the damages and destructions of monuments and historical sights during the Paris commune while thousands of parisians were being shot and imprisoned by the reactionarys. Every day 18 000 kids die of starvation all over the world and you have the nerve to complain about the vandalization of some "great stalinist cultural heritage"???
Yeah, guess what? We all care about the children dying of starvation, a lot more than this too. But that doesn't mean we should just give up on the little issues does it? It doesn't mean that we can't be outraged at something which is blatantly disgusting. If that was the case we would give up fighting for worker's power on the basis that the world is slowly meeting its doom via global warming

[Sam_b]

I'm kind of torn on this one. It isn't permanent, which is a good thing. As an example of Socialist Realism, whether or not you agree with remit and message, it should be preserved as a testament of its time - historical and cultural significance, that is. I've always found these type of statues and monuments fascinating.

[Decolonize The Left]

I'm all for the defamation of idols.

This isn't to say that I like everything about this piece at all, just to say that idol worship ought to be challenged whenever possible, even in an act such as this.

- August

[Decolonize The Left]

Only on Tuesday's
Seriously monuments are like photos. If it where a picture of your long dead father, I believe you would care

If I am absurd, then your ignorant

Lol.

Monuments aren't like photos, photos are personal things, monuments are public. Photos of a long dead dad live in a picture-frame in your house. Monuments glorifying historical acts like in concrete in a park.

So no, you're still absurd.

- August

[Hit The North]

Bullshit article, I'd love to see how the Daily Mail would react if the monument had been for British soldiers who fought in that war.

Good point. This is how they reacted to a recent "desecration" of a Churchill statue in Paris (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1207719/Desecration-hero-Hands-Churchill-statue-Paris-painted-blood-red-protesters-blaming-death-millions.html).

And they went ballistic when this happened:

http://greatwenlondon.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/images8.jpg

As for the art work in Sofia, it leaves me feeling quite ambivalent, but I agree that the work is juvenile, but also agree whole heartedly with Old Mole that monuments are made to be defaced.

[Rafiq]

Fuck who ever did that.
Its a statue to goddamned heros.
it would be like doing that to the iwo jima memorial

We should totally do that.

[Old Mole]

Yeah, guess what? We all care about the children dying of starvation, a lot more than this too. But that doesn't mean we should just give up on the little issues does it? It doesn't mean that we can't be outraged at something which is blatantly disgusting. If that was the case we would give up fighting for worker's power on the basis that the world is slowly meeting its doom via global warming
But why is this even an issue? The original monument is actually quite tasteless in the same way that the american imperialists monuments are tasteless. Its a false representation of war constructed to create a heroic narrative that would strenghten the Soviet union. This piece of trash doesnt acknowledge the sacrifices of the soldiers of the red army, it doesnt portray the horrors of war, the fact that the losers in all capitalist wars are the working class. Rather, it is just the soviet union manifesting its power. "We are the Soviets, so we can put a statue in this country because we conquered it" How can anyone be proud of this?

[Reznov]

Who cares, its a fucking statue.

But, the artwork is pretty fucking good, ill give you that much!

[Agent Ducky]

It made me laugh inside and it was a good idea.

Maybe that makes me a bad comrade, but whatever. They did a good job and they had a pretty brilliant idea there. And someone on the front page gave a good way to interpret it....

[Dire Helix]

Having been to Bulgaria recently and seen a vast amount of white nationalist graffiti, symbols, slogans and swastikas, this kind of graffiti comes as a welcome relief.

Exactly. In Russia such monuments are defaced with swastikas and Nazi slogans. This graffiti is cool beans.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Fuck who ever did that.
Its a statue to goddamned heros.
it would be like doing that to the iwo jima memorial

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/1/V/iraq_mcdonalds.jpg
http://www.psywar.org/psywar/thumbnails/War_for_oil.jpg
http://www.nocaptionneeded.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/museumplein.png
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics//HTimages_a/A02z_014_gay-flag.jpg
http://static.royalacademy.org.uk/images/width370/dface-1012.jpg

War monuments of this kind are just there to promote nationalist myths of "shared sacrifice" and create a sense of populist national unity. Ideally, I think they should be taken out of public squares after the revolution and kept in public museums or whatnot if they have historical or artistic merit. If people deface them in the mean time, I'm not too bothered.

[☭The Revolution☭]

The drug-addict teenagers that did this need to be shot.

[danyboy27]

The drug-addict teenagers that did this need to be shot.

why are you presuming the guy uis a drug addict?

[Jimmie Higgins]

The drug-addict teenagers that did this need to be shot.Which minor crime, drug addiction or vandalism is worthy of murder or capital punishment.

Seriously, you guys sound like Christian right-wingers after NBC cut out "under God" from a clip of the US pledge of allegiance.

Actual contemporary fascism is on the upswing in Eastern Europe but this is what everyone gets all upset about?

[bcbm]

i think the message is extremely ambivalent and would be hesitant to connect it to fukuyama and the end of history stuff. i saw it more as a critique of the new capitalist era

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

Lol.

Monuments aren't like photos, photos are personal things, monuments are public. Photos of a long dead dad live in a picture-frame in your house. Monuments glorifying historical acts like in concrete in a park.

So no, you're still absurd.

- August}
true....
but oh well, cant change the world, can we?

[CynicalIdealist]

It's not a "Stalinist" myth,its a monument to the soldiers who died in the war,and as such,it should be regarded as something worth perserving,no matter how much time passed from the end of WW2.

I would expect a communist to be against glorifying the military in such a way.

[Omsk]

Its not a glorification of the Red Army,because the Red Army does not need glorification,the deeds of many Soviet soldiers who fought the Nazis are enough,the heroism should always be remembered.

[ZeroNowhere]

The drug-addict teenagers that did this need to be shot.I, too, am consumed with incoherent rage at this despicable act.

[Anarchrusty]

Its not a glorification of the Red Army,because the Red Army does not need glorification,the deeds of many Soviet soldiers who fought the Nazis are enough,the heroism should always be remembered.

Even though I am appalled by this act of vandalism (come on, Ronald McDOnalds? Capitalist propaganda in it's ugliest form) and even though I realise the Soviets were needed to push back the fascists and I am grateful for that, they weren't the heroes you like to portray them.
I heard they raped hundreds of thousands of women in an act of entitlement to war booty. Ever considered how that must have been for those victimised?

Also, remember Kronstadt and the Night of the Doctors.

[ZeroNowhere]

come on, Ronald McDOnalds? Capitalist propaganda in it's ugliest form
But it has Santa Claus, so maybe it's utopian socialist propaganda.

[Anarchrusty]

Not true. Santa Clause predates Marxist thought by at least a couple of thousand years. If memory serves he was derived by Christians from an old Norwegian God called (..... Sorry I forgot) who re-issued him so to speak for their own purposes. Even the tree was somewhere in that story, tree of life I believe, that general idea.

[Anarchrusty]

There you go, quoted from a website dealing with Santa Clause subject matter:

His earliest ancestors date back to pre-Christian days, when sky-riding gods ruled the earth. The mythological characters Odin, Thor, and Saturn gave us the basis for many of Santa's distinctive characteristics.
But the most influential figure in the shaping of today's generous as loving Santa Claus was a real man. St. Nicholas of Myra (now Turkey), a fourth century bishop. As a champion of children and the needy, he was legendary for his kindness and generosity.

[bcbm]

come on, Ronald McDOnalds? Capitalist propaganda in it's ugliest form

i think that was the point....

[9]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8241&stc=1&d=1308729365



i love it.

[Revy]

Anyone know what the words (presumably in Bulgarian) below the statues say?

[9]

moving with the times

[PhoenixAsh]

The monument was build to commemorate the liberation of Buldaria from its fascist allegience. No matter what you think of the USSR and of the subsequent "eastern bloc" it is the battle against fascism and the overthrow of a government allied with fascists that is commemorated here and that is what should be remembered.

The capital is littered with nazi symbols and graffiti...and it appears from many sources that this statue has been the target of many spray paint attacks in its history. The government does nothing to clan up the graffiti...the clean up of this monument was paid for by a Bulgarian-Russian friendship organisation. Who had to work during midnight to avoid clashes with those who wanted to monument to stay this way.

There are a lot of theories about what the message is the artist wanted to convey.

They range from across the political spectrum....from critcising the socialists to criticising the current capitalist system. Whatever the case Banksy did not leave a statement.

[turquino]

I think it shows how the sphere of art and culture is very much a battlefield of class struggle. If red guards during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution knocked the head off a statue that represented oppressive feudal superstition, bourgeois commentators in the West decried it as an act of sinister totalitarianism. If a punk defaces a war monument with tacky american shit, a monument to the heroism of those who fought against the most evil regime in history, it's just some lighthearted fun according to the anarchists, liberals etc. If communists come to power again, there can be no 'safe zones' for bourgeois art and culture, just as there should be no safe zones for bourgeois property. Socialist culture must replace it totally.

[bcbm]

I think it shows how the sphere of art and culture is very much a battlefield of class struggle. If red guards during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution knocked the head off a statue that represented oppressive feudal superstition, bourgeois commentators in the West decried it as an act of sinister totalitarianism. If a punk defaces a war monument with tacky american shit, a monument to the heroism of those who fought against the most evil regime in history, it's just some lighthearted fun according to the anarchists, liberals etc. If communists come to power again, there can be no 'safe zones' for bourgeois art and culture, just as there should be no safe zones for bourgeois property. Socialist culture must replace it totally.

burn the louvre!


:bored:

[Os Cangaceiros]

I think it shows how the sphere of art and culture is very much a battlefield of class struggle. If red guards during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution knocked the head off a statue that represented oppressive feudal superstition, bourgeois commentators in the West decried it as an act of sinister totalitarianism. If a punk defaces a war monument with tacky american shit, a monument to the heroism of those who fought against the most evil regime in history, it's just some lighthearted fun according to the anarchists, liberals etc. If communists come to power again, there can be no 'safe zones' for bourgeois art and culture, just as there should be no safe zones for bourgeois property. Socialist culture must replace it totally.

I can't wait to watch endless films about the importance of keeping your tractor well-maintained in order to achieve a peak harvest for the people. :closedeyes:

[Hit The North]

Not true. Santa Clause predates Marxist thought by at least a couple of thousand years. If memory serves he was derived by Christians from an old Norwegian God called (..... Sorry I forgot) who re-issued him so to speak for their own purposes. Even the tree was somewhere in that story, tree of life I believe, that general idea.

Yes, but the artist is clearly rendering the Coca Cola Santa Clause of early Twentieth Century origin.

[Anarchrusty]

I think it shows how the sphere of art and culture is very much a battlefield of class struggle. If red guards during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution knocked the head off a statue that represented oppressive feudal superstition, bourgeois commentators in the West decried it as an act of sinister totalitarianism. If a punk defaces a war monument with tacky american shit, a monument to the heroism of those who fought against the most evil regime in history, it's just some lighthearted fun according to the anarchists, liberals etc. If communists come to power again, there can be no 'safe zones' for bourgeois art and culture, just as there should be no safe zones for bourgeois property. Socialist culture must replace it totally.

You cannot dismiss art as a bourgeoise institution per se. Dadaism was anarchic in nature, Picasso was an avowed communist.
If you read Andre Breton's manifest on surrealism, you'll realise the movement was revolutionary from the onset, looking to disrupt the establishment by turning any subscribed meaning into something else.
Art is necessary as a tool. Don't dismiss it.

Even art that is not radical to begin with, say Leonardo or Rembrand, does have it's merit coz it says something of the culture and society it comes from. Plus it looks cool.

[Old Mole]

You cannot dismiss art as a bourgeoise institution per se. Dadaism was anarchic in nature, Picasso was an avowed communist.
If you read Andre Breton's manifest on surrealism, you'll realise the movement was revolutionary from the onset, looking to disrupt the establishment by turning any subscribed meaning into something else.
Art is necessary as a tool. Don't dismiss it.

Even art that is not radical to begin with, say Leonardo or Rembrand, does have it's merit coz it says something of the culture and society it comes from. Plus it looks cool.
I missed where Triquino dismissed art as a bourgeois institution, but I on the other hand subscribe to this view. What is the one thing common to all art? It is that itis called art, nothing else. Who, then, decides what is art? There most be a broad consensus in capitalist society, i. e the ruling class decides. Art is by definition elitist and in order to distinguish between "good" and "bad" art you must acquire bourrgeois taste which leads to bourgeois mindset. The dadaists for example were staunchly ANTI-ART, but then, when the revolutionary potential of their movement had died out dadaism was integrated into bourgeois culture as revolutionary art (you know, because they (the cappies) want us to believe it was a leap forward and not a negation of the institution as a whole)

[Jimmie Higgins]

Art is by definition elitist and in order to distinguish between "good" and "bad" art you must acquire bourrgeois taste which leads to bourgeois mindset. The dadaists for example were staunchly ANTI-ART, but then, when the revolutionary potential of their movement had died out dadaism was integrated into bourgeois culture as revolutionary art (you know, because they (the cappies) want us to believe it was a leap forward and not a negation of the institution as a whole)

When people study or appreciate Medieval or Renaissance art, does it make them have a feudal christian mindset? When people see a Shakespeare play do they become monarchists?

Art is confined by the social relations of whatever society it comes from and in capitalism that means that people who are able to make a living doing art are basically selling it to collectors and elite institutions and this can cause art to take on a fad-y nature. But art that can exist outside its context, art that "stands the test of time" holds a great deal of value for all people, the crime isn't that it is informed by the ruling class values of this society (as almost everything is including education) the crime is that few people have the ability to view art as well as persue their own creative potential with the free-time, training, and tools that could help them achieve this.

It's not up to us to decide what's going to be valuable to liberated people in the future, I'm sure some art will hold up and be valuable historically, technically, aesthetically, or thematically... other things that are the hot shit today won't even be remembered.

[Old Mole]

When people study or appreciate Medieval or Renaissance art, does it make them have a feudal christian mindset? When people see a Shakespeare play do they become monarchists?
No, but when studying art you have to consider that bourgeois conceptions of earlier epochs dominates contemporary society. Who owns the galleries? Who decides what is worth saving and displaying from other eras? Just as the ruling class subjects other kinds of history to their ideas, they subject art history, hence producing false history (from a proletarian standpoint) that is reproduced in art galleries, art books, etc., etc.

"Art is confined by the social relations of whatever society it comes from and in capitalism that means that people who are able to make a living doing art are basically selling it to collectors and elite institutions and this can cause art to take on a fad-y nature."
This is very true, maybe we could even go as far as claiming that:

"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an 'eternal law.'"
/Karl Marx, The German Ideology

" But art that can exist outside its context, art that "stands the test of time" holds a great deal of value for all people, the crime isn't that it is informed by the ruling class values of this society (as almost everything is including education) the crime is that few people have the ability to view art as well as persue their own creative potential with the free-time, training, and tools that could help them achieve this."
As a materialist, I do not think that art can ever exist outside its context. What is considered of eternal value, and art that has stand "the test of time" is nothing but what the bourgeoisie judges to be so. People with leftist, even communist leanings working with culture and science, for example, has a tendency to be quite provoked when told that they do not operate outside class society. Just like the ruling class rules over education, so they rule over art, thus they are bourgeois institutions.
The truth is that, contrary to what some people might say, the concept of art is reinvented by the every ruling class to fit into its conception of the world. There is little in common between cave paintings in Lascaux and paintings by Matisse, the former created for religious purposes, the latter for display purposes.

"It's not up to us to decide what's going to be valuable to liberated people in the future, I'm sure some art will hold up and be valuable historically, technically, aesthetically, or thematically... other things that are the hot shit today won't even be remembered."
I agree, its not up to us, but neither will it be decided in the anarchy of the market. So I totally agree with you on this.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

This isn't politics is any way, it's ComradeErich's usual lusting after Soviet nostalgia, should be in the history, the dustbin or the dustbin of history really.:thumbup1:

[heyjoe]

i agree with Eric and Uncle Sam. Its a total lack of respect for the memories and sacrifices made by those who came before you. This current generation is not the only generation. There are those who came before and displayed courage which is somewhat incomprehensible in the times we live in now. Make your own history, your own monuments. Do something to make people's lives better in your own times. Dont denigrate or disrespect or make a joke out of the efforts of those who wanted to honor their loved ones.

[Pretty Flaco]

i was watching adult swim and there was one of those little commercial adult swim commercial type things and it showed this graffiti.
It highlighted all of the characters the artist made and then it showed first the original with the caption SOVIET OCCUPATION and then the graffiti with the caption CAPITALIST OCCUPATION and I lol'd :p

[Ben Barton]

I am shocked that the majority of you are defending the vile and disrespectful people that did this. Call this a leftist forum, I joined to be among those who cared and wanted to achieve a similar goal, all I have found are a load of people who seem not to give a damn looking for a massive argument, regardless of what it is about. If you really wish to condone the defacement of war memorials, communist or not, then I think you have a lack of respect and a warped sense of how we should be treating each other.

[☭The Revolution☭]

I am shocked that the majority of you are defending the vile and disrespectful people that did this. Call this a leftist forum, I joined to be among those who cared and wanted to achieve a similar goal, all I have found are a load of people who seem not to give a damn looking for a massive argument, regardless of what it is about. If you really wish to condone the defacement of war memorials, communist or not, then I think you have a lack of respect and a warped sense of how we should be treating each other.

Welcome to Revleft, my fellow Leninist. The largest collection of American middle class liberals on the internet.

[9]

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/7084/lolibd.jpg


lol what a jackass :lol:

[Pretty Flaco]

Welcome to Revleft, my fellow Leninist. The largest collection of American middle class liberals on the internet.
But the American middle class finds graffiti appalling.

I find it damn good fun. :rolleyes:


I am shocked that the majority of you are defending the vile and disrespectful people that did this. Call this a leftist forum, I joined to be among those who cared and wanted to achieve a similar goal, all I have found are a load of people who seem not to give a damn looking for a massive argument, regardless of what it is about. If you really wish to condone the defacement of war memorials, communist or not, then I think you have a lack of respect and a warped sense of how we should be treating each other.

It's not a war memorial, it's a memorial for Russian expansionism.

[ColonelCossack]

zomfg... it says " "liberation" of Bulgaria in 1944". why the quotation marks??? they were liberated!!! from the nazis!!!!!

[W1N5T0N]

The "artist" was making a point here, i believe. Namely that the soviet soldiers were fighting against capitalism/fascism, and now it has caught up even with them.

[∞]

Welcome to Revleft, my fellow Leninist. The largest collection of American middle class liberals on the internet.

I'd rather be a middle-class liberal than a twelve-year-old who mentally masturbates to soviet monuments. Honestly, why should anyone here give a fuck about some graffiti?

[W1N5T0N]

Graffiti is and always will be the ultimate freedom of expression...

[infearoffear]

That graffiti was actually really well done

[The Douche]

I definitely interpreted this as a critique of capital. Not as an assault on the scarifice of the red army.

Today the people of eastern europe are told they have been liberated from socialism by the west, and this reworking of the monument demonstrates the absurdity of that idea.

[∞]

^^agreed

By spray-painting them with capitalist icons it is suggesting that capitalism is the new face of power. Meaning that things are not very different (or in some cases worse), than it was a soviet-satellite state.

[Ben Barton]

So explain to me how defacing a monument such as this is good? I fail to see this as anything more than a representation of how capitalistic ideology is being planted in the children of today and giving them incentive to damage something that celebrates communism, that is all this is, pro-capitalist education changing the mindset of today's youth.

[☭The Revolution☭]

I'd rather be a middle-class liberal than a twelve-year-old who mentally masturbates to soviet monuments. Honestly, why should anyone here give a fuck about some graffiti?

Because a lot of men gave their lives to free those nations from fascism, you fuck.

[∞]

Because a lot of men gave their lives to free those nations from fascism, you fuck.

:crying:, Let us all remember them. They were so braaave I just want to baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw!

[☭The Revolution☭]

:crying:, Let us all remember them. They were so braaave I just want to baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw!

Omg i Knowwwwwww i wish dose icky boyz wood just get along ugh fighting is so gross id prefer to stay in my middle class cali house and file my nalez hoo da fuck actually wants to do anything but talk about freedom and a better future. Silly Boys :rolleyes:

[∞]

Omg i Knowwwwwww i wish dose icky boyz wood just get along ugh fighting is so gross id prefer to stay in my middle class cali house and file my nalez hoo da fuck actually wants to do anything but talk about freedom and a better future. Silly Boys :rolleyes:

No iz all bout da revolution. Thas why I walk around in a Ushanka and have a hammer and sickle tattooed on my arse. Does capp13 pigs will pay for D3str0y1n USSR. AK47 WOO! WOO!

BTW, Your post had some sexist overtones.

[☭The Revolution☭]

Your post had some dumbfuck overtones.

[ComradeGrant]

A whole lot of intelligence in this thread. It's graffiti. Nothing is exempt from criticism, and in this case a lot of people are missing the point.

[The Douche]

People bemoaning the supposed defacement of the monument. Please adress my suggestion that it is not defacement but instead a commentary on the restoration of capitalism in the absurd.