Gadianton wrote:Yes, Blixa, there are some serious blind-spots in SWK's remarks. But I've picked up a special interest, thanks to Scratch's insinuations, in the connections between art in the church and art under the reign of Stalin. I have a further interest in the development of Mormon art on the whole and the possibilities of "high culture" within the church.
I wonder how useful it is to consider the opposite end of the aesthetic-political spectrum: i.e., commercially-driven "art" such as dominates U.S. popular culture---i.e., art which is principally about reproducing and spreading itself (a facet of U.S. popular culture which foreign observers often complain about). In a sense, it is wholly accurate to label SWK's remarks as "mad," since he seems to want to have it both ways---art which both edifies the institutional ideology, and art which "purifies" the masses virus-style.
Gadianton wrote:Yes, Blixa, there are some serious blind-spots in SWK's remarks. But I've picked up a special interest, thanks to Scratch's insinuations, in the connections between art in the church and art under the reign of Stalin. I have a further interest in the development of Mormon art on the whole and the possibilities of "high culture" within the church.
I wonder how useful it is to consider the opposite end of the aesthetic-political spectrum: I.e., commercially-driven "art" such as dominates U.S. popular culture---I.e., art which is principally about reproducing and spreading itself (a facet of U.S. popular culture which foreign observers often complain about). In a sense, it is wholly accurate to label SWK's remarks as "mad," since he seems to want to have it both ways---art which both edifies the institutional ideology, and art which "purifies" the masses virus-style.
What's wrong with being mad?
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Gadianton wrote:Yes, Blixa, there are some serious blind-spots in SWK's remarks. But I've picked up a special interest, thanks to Scratch's insinuations, in the connections between art in the church and art under the reign of Stalin. I have a further interest in the development of Mormon art on the whole and the possibilities of "high culture" within the church.
I wonder how useful it is to consider the opposite end of the aesthetic-political spectrum: I.e., commercially-driven "art" such as dominates U.S. popular culture---I.e., art which is principally about reproducing and spreading itself (a facet of U.S. popular culture which foreign observers often complain about). In a sense, it is wholly accurate to label SWK's remarks as "mad," since he seems to want to have it both ways---art which both edifies the institutional ideology, and art which "purifies" the masses virus-style.
Scratch, I am definitely interested in your suggestion. I don't know whether you read my entire OP, I realize it's long, but I am considerably interested in art as popular consumption within Mormonism and as I noted, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism article is basically resigned to Mormon art as prolific and uninteresting. The tension you note is one that the Soviet Union also faced. Much of the art is great in a historical and technical context, but as many commentators note, stylistically static and bland. I think it's questionable whether or not the U.S.S.R succeeded in creating something of high cultural value or whether its necessity to appeal to the common man (lower the bar on art rather than raise the bar on man) undercut its efforts.
On second thought though, what exactly do you mean by, "edifying institutional ideology"?
You've brought this up twice now. If you want to know what's wrong with being "mad", you'll have to take the next step in your spiritual journey and meet up with SWK from beyond the veil, and ask him. After all, I never explicitly said there was anything wrong with Kimball being mad, as many of the great artists were also mad. Maybe Kimball's angst was due to a talented and expressive artist trapped inside that could never properly be expressed? Recall, it was Kimball who chided Wagner for being "too eccentric", he's the one who has a problem with madness, not me.
Seth,
That's a great cover! And a fine example of Mormon "tractor art".
Thanks for this topic. It hadn't occurred to me to compare Mormon prophet-worship art with communist tractor art, but now that the connection has been suggested, I see how well that fits. It's uncanny, and disturbing on some level. The only art that seems really kosher in mormondom seems to be art that either glorifies Joseph Smith, or Jesus, or some kind of pioneer scene like struggling with an ox or burying a child in the frozen earth.
And can't you just imagine a giant Joseph Smith statue just like the image on the cover of that Ensign? Doesn't that make you think of the giant Saddam Hussein the Army helped pull down in that square in Baghdad using the tank wrecker back in 2003? It's almost enough to give one a shiver up down one's spine.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Just a note, especially for those who didn't read my whole post which I admit ended up being too long, what really motivated me to pursue this topic was the fact that I figured making that connection wasn't wholly inventive on my part (or Scratch's) and expected to find a Mormon critic who'd suggested it, and prepared for apologists (at the point in which they, if ever, find interest) to say I'm drawing cheap parallels. Imagine how surprised I was to find that a number of TBM intellectuals have already made the connection and are/were excited about the possibility of a world-class tradition.
And to your point about the statues, you did see my link here, right?
No, I hadn't seen that. One word: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
First, I gotta say, I love how Joseph Smith has morphed into a stud muffin. ;)
I do remember SWK's particular interest in Mormon art. I'm not sure why I remember it so well - perhaps because I had just converted to the church and was enamored of the whole shebang. It perplexed me WHY Mormons weren't producing the GREATEST of EVERYTHING. Not just art, but science and medicine as well. With the HG as the cutting edge, it seemed like we should be a step ahead of the "darker" (spiritually, but given the time period I converted, somewhat tongue in cheek) folks who relied only on their own measly intellect. Perhaps this was the first cog dis I experienced, and hence, my particular memory of it all?
I concluded personally that the reason Mormons didn't produce great art was because we were such HAPPY HAPPY folks. Great art seemed to produce by people suffering a lot of angst, and with the ONE TRUE CHURCH and all, there was just no room for angst in our lives.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.