I'm afraid, Franklin, that the parties in question are beyond the help you offer or anything of the sort, which is obviously part of the problem. There can be no cure without recognition of the disease.
This is really the question, whether they interpret the shedding of board members and the appearance of a rival organization as signals to question their assumptions, or to do what they're already doing even more vehemently. But that's above my proverbial pay grade. I decided quite consciously to reform my situation, not theirs.
Nice article and very informative. I mentioned over at Alexander Adams' manifesto that white men need a Ruskin and patrons. You certainly could fill the former's shoes but getting patrons would be a chore, I suppose. I don't think non-profits and such are going to work – you need a kind of fraternity. You especially need wealthy individuals or maybe a group that is not crazy but identifies with European culture and doesn't care about being called names.
The possibility of becoming the Ruskin for contemporary white male artists does not appeal to me. First of all it's dubious whether I'm white, and if I am it's not something for which I feel any allegiance. Second, women and people of color who are making art that doesn't reinforce progressive narratives are getting just as neglected by the philanthropic and institutional systems as the white men. White artists can in fact garner recognition for their work by aiming it at climate change or gun violence or some other project of progressive point-scoring. Third, critics are now basically powerless. Even if one had a Ruskin in one's circle it's doubtful that he could accomplish anything.
What we have that the Victorians didn't are crowdfunding and cryptocurrency. I'd like to instigate a project that acknowledges art-value wherever it can be found and supports it in philosophical and organizational defiance of the gatekeepers. That is the burgeoning work of Dissident Muse, for which this is the journal.
That's too bad about your not identifying with European culture. You seemed to but I also noticed you have maybe Jewish heritage. It's a shame because you recognize the anti-white male problem. If you are Jewish, or part Jewish, you surely must know that blacks think you are white and may even mistrust you more than just plain ol' white guys.
I am getting the impression you haven't dealt with many black people, or else you're in denial.
It's also insulting to suggest someone make a work of art to appease another group in order to manipulate them, i.e., climate and gun stuff. Especially when the artist doesn't hold that belief. It's like forcing the fellow in Colorado to bake a cake. The assholes who do this never give up. Haven't you noticed? The tranny's are now harassing him even after he won at the Supreme Court.
You're never going to get rid of gatekeepers. People need authority figures to tell them what's important and good. This is fundamental, immutable human nature.
I do agree that NFTs are something to think about but normal sane white men are being forced to develop a coherent position. And one vital fact is emerging: they will quit worrying about people who really don't like or care about them.
You may not agree with me but that's the way the world is heading, whether you like it or not.
The unfortunate problem is that when my people were in Europe, they were considered Levantine. Moldova and the regions that used to be the Austro-Hungarian Empire were not even considered to be part of the West until the second half of the 20th century. Jewish race is a political issue, with competing political claims. I identify with European art and much Western thought, as well as Asian art and much Asian thought, and Levantine art and much Levantine thought.
I'm aware, and have written about, the phenomenon that certain blacks think that we epitomize whiteness and ought to be eliminated, while certain whites think that we're not white enough and ought to be eliminated. Murders mere weeks apart at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh and JC Kosher Supermarket in Jersey City violently underscored the two views in 2019. What they tell me is that I'm responsible for defining myself. My reaction to the progressive hostility to white men is not to embrace my male whiteness and consolidate with other male whites, but to reject the progressive ethos and embrace existential equality - the equality of all people before God. I don't know if it's coherent, but this is my position, the name-callers be damned:
I tend to think, anyway, that the progressive hostility to white men is not an end in itself, but a means to establish progressive dictatorships in the US, Canada, and Europe.
I believe what happens with the climate and anti-gun art is that straight white people know that they'll get support out of the progressive-overwhelmed system if they pander on one of the few angles available to them, and more or less voluntarily change what they're doing. No one is forcing them, they just don't have very much talent or integrity. What's being done to Jack Phillips is another kind of thing, and appalling in its own way.
My aim is not to eliminate the gatekeepers, but to defy the reigning ones at the moment and thrive anyway.
"My reaction to the progressive hostility to white men is not to embrace my male whiteness and consolidate with other male whites, but to reject the progressive ethos and embrace existential equality"
Great. Let's get rid of forced sexual and racial quotas and bring back freedom of association. You can hire or approve membership based on any criteria a gallery or organization wants. And this applies to businesses too. If you don't want to paint a portrait or make some other product, provide a service or allow membership for whatever reason then that's not only legal but healthy and natural.
Agreed. The state has no legitimate interest in the question of with whom I do or do not associate and on what terms. I support gay marriage for the same reason.
The West and the US in particular are obsessed with a feminized view of love. Speaking of which St. Valentines Day is viewed askance in about 3/4 of the world. Another big problem for "diversity." For example, arranged marriages are made in about half of all marriages in India. In most places, marriage is about two families who join together to perpetrate their line.
Even in the West, arranged marriages were common for thousands of years. No big deal. I'm not sure when the idea of romantic love started. I just saw a production of Shakespeare's last play, The Tempest, and there was a love at first sight motif (not gay of course) with two characters. I suspect romantic love began when men began to think of themselves as kinda god-like.
"No one is forcing them, they just don't have very much talent or integrity."
You do realize you are making a judgment about quality and that you are saying, if these artists cannot actively support this position that I am spelling out, e.g., climate change and gun control, then they are unequal to artists who do support climate change or gun control.
I'm not saying that at all. Their ability to illustrate some talking point is beside the point of their ability to produce good work. In theory those concerns don't conflict, but in practice most artists can't keep their eye on both balls at once.
I find this whole situation of only morbid interest, like a dissection of a diseased or deformed body. It feels both alien and alienating, and while I can understand what it's about, I cannot relate to it--not least because it seems to be overwhelmingly about issues other than art itself.
I have no use for critics thus embroiled, not to say obsessed, so their professional fate does not affect me. Of course, it helps to be long practiced in being my own critic, which always takes precedence over the opinions, claims or practices of any other person or entity. Art for me is a personal interaction with the work, meaning it's between me and the work, period. Those who cannot or will not deal with art on their own and depend on outside "help" may be better off dealing with something else anyway.
I'm afraid, Franklin, that the parties in question are beyond the help you offer or anything of the sort, which is obviously part of the problem. There can be no cure without recognition of the disease.
This is really the question, whether they interpret the shedding of board members and the appearance of a rival organization as signals to question their assumptions, or to do what they're already doing even more vehemently. But that's above my proverbial pay grade. I decided quite consciously to reform my situation, not theirs.
Nice article and very informative. I mentioned over at Alexander Adams' manifesto that white men need a Ruskin and patrons. You certainly could fill the former's shoes but getting patrons would be a chore, I suppose. I don't think non-profits and such are going to work – you need a kind of fraternity. You especially need wealthy individuals or maybe a group that is not crazy but identifies with European culture and doesn't care about being called names.
The possibility of becoming the Ruskin for contemporary white male artists does not appeal to me. First of all it's dubious whether I'm white, and if I am it's not something for which I feel any allegiance. Second, women and people of color who are making art that doesn't reinforce progressive narratives are getting just as neglected by the philanthropic and institutional systems as the white men. White artists can in fact garner recognition for their work by aiming it at climate change or gun violence or some other project of progressive point-scoring. Third, critics are now basically powerless. Even if one had a Ruskin in one's circle it's doubtful that he could accomplish anything.
What we have that the Victorians didn't are crowdfunding and cryptocurrency. I'd like to instigate a project that acknowledges art-value wherever it can be found and supports it in philosophical and organizational defiance of the gatekeepers. That is the burgeoning work of Dissident Muse, for which this is the journal.
https://dissidentmuse.com/
That's too bad about your not identifying with European culture. You seemed to but I also noticed you have maybe Jewish heritage. It's a shame because you recognize the anti-white male problem. If you are Jewish, or part Jewish, you surely must know that blacks think you are white and may even mistrust you more than just plain ol' white guys.
I am getting the impression you haven't dealt with many black people, or else you're in denial.
It's also insulting to suggest someone make a work of art to appease another group in order to manipulate them, i.e., climate and gun stuff. Especially when the artist doesn't hold that belief. It's like forcing the fellow in Colorado to bake a cake. The assholes who do this never give up. Haven't you noticed? The tranny's are now harassing him even after he won at the Supreme Court.
You're never going to get rid of gatekeepers. People need authority figures to tell them what's important and good. This is fundamental, immutable human nature.
I do agree that NFTs are something to think about but normal sane white men are being forced to develop a coherent position. And one vital fact is emerging: they will quit worrying about people who really don't like or care about them.
You may not agree with me but that's the way the world is heading, whether you like it or not.
The unfortunate problem is that when my people were in Europe, they were considered Levantine. Moldova and the regions that used to be the Austro-Hungarian Empire were not even considered to be part of the West until the second half of the 20th century. Jewish race is a political issue, with competing political claims. I identify with European art and much Western thought, as well as Asian art and much Asian thought, and Levantine art and much Levantine thought.
I'm aware, and have written about, the phenomenon that certain blacks think that we epitomize whiteness and ought to be eliminated, while certain whites think that we're not white enough and ought to be eliminated. Murders mere weeks apart at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh and JC Kosher Supermarket in Jersey City violently underscored the two views in 2019. What they tell me is that I'm responsible for defining myself. My reaction to the progressive hostility to white men is not to embrace my male whiteness and consolidate with other male whites, but to reject the progressive ethos and embrace existential equality - the equality of all people before God. I don't know if it's coherent, but this is my position, the name-callers be damned:
https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.16.20
I tend to think, anyway, that the progressive hostility to white men is not an end in itself, but a means to establish progressive dictatorships in the US, Canada, and Europe.
http://www.artblog.net/post/2021/10/art-after-liberalism-1/
I believe what happens with the climate and anti-gun art is that straight white people know that they'll get support out of the progressive-overwhelmed system if they pander on one of the few angles available to them, and more or less voluntarily change what they're doing. No one is forcing them, they just don't have very much talent or integrity. What's being done to Jack Phillips is another kind of thing, and appalling in its own way.
My aim is not to eliminate the gatekeepers, but to defy the reigning ones at the moment and thrive anyway.
"My reaction to the progressive hostility to white men is not to embrace my male whiteness and consolidate with other male whites, but to reject the progressive ethos and embrace existential equality"
Great. Let's get rid of forced sexual and racial quotas and bring back freedom of association. You can hire or approve membership based on any criteria a gallery or organization wants. And this applies to businesses too. If you don't want to paint a portrait or make some other product, provide a service or allow membership for whatever reason then that's not only legal but healthy and natural.
Agreed. The state has no legitimate interest in the question of with whom I do or do not associate and on what terms. I support gay marriage for the same reason.
The West and the US in particular are obsessed with a feminized view of love. Speaking of which St. Valentines Day is viewed askance in about 3/4 of the world. Another big problem for "diversity." For example, arranged marriages are made in about half of all marriages in India. In most places, marriage is about two families who join together to perpetrate their line.
Even in the West, arranged marriages were common for thousands of years. No big deal. I'm not sure when the idea of romantic love started. I just saw a production of Shakespeare's last play, The Tempest, and there was a love at first sight motif (not gay of course) with two characters. I suspect romantic love began when men began to think of themselves as kinda god-like.
"No one is forcing them, they just don't have very much talent or integrity."
You do realize you are making a judgment about quality and that you are saying, if these artists cannot actively support this position that I am spelling out, e.g., climate change and gun control, then they are unequal to artists who do support climate change or gun control.
I'm not saying that at all. Their ability to illustrate some talking point is beside the point of their ability to produce good work. In theory those concerns don't conflict, but in practice most artists can't keep their eye on both balls at once.
I find this whole situation of only morbid interest, like a dissection of a diseased or deformed body. It feels both alien and alienating, and while I can understand what it's about, I cannot relate to it--not least because it seems to be overwhelmingly about issues other than art itself.
I have no use for critics thus embroiled, not to say obsessed, so their professional fate does not affect me. Of course, it helps to be long practiced in being my own critic, which always takes precedence over the opinions, claims or practices of any other person or entity. Art for me is a personal interaction with the work, meaning it's between me and the work, period. Those who cannot or will not deal with art on their own and depend on outside "help" may be better off dealing with something else anyway.