Reply With Quote
not so much that the race was fixed, as the CIA bet on a winning horse imho. still, there are stunning quotations by ex-officials in the article
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...n-1578808.htmlFor decades in art circles it was either a rumour or a joke, but now it is confirmed as a fact. The Central Intelligence Agency used American modern art - including the works of such artists as Jackson Pollock, Robert Motherwell, Willem de Kooning and Mark Rothko - as a weapon in the Cold War. In the manner of a Renaissance prince - except that it acted secretly - the CIA fostered and promoted American Abstract Expressionist painting around the world for more than 20 years.
not so much that the race was fixed, as the CIA bet on a winning horse imho. still, there are stunning quotations by ex-officials in the article
There's pretty heavy do entation about the government's involvement in the promotion of Abstract Expressionism. Especially within Latin America, where we staged a number of traveling exhibitions in the attempt to stifle the relationship between the communist leaning social realist art communities of Europe and Latin America.
Art historical thought is that all of this was largely unsuccessful, though. Abstract Expressionism remained a largely American movement because the rest of the art world didn't really give a damn. Also, a number of the AbExers had ties to the Mexican muralists and other non-US based movements/art communities, making the uniquely American American-ness of the whole thing pretty spurious.
interesting. are there any particular sources on that you can share, CF?
Not really an art-kind-of-guy but I find this part interesting:
As I understand it a lot of freedoms&rights enjoyed in last century were thanks to that -measuring contest with Soviet Union. Now motivation is gone and you (we)'re screwed, basically. Irony is thick."We wanted to unite all the people who were writers, who were musicians, who were artists, to demonstrate that the West and the United States was devoted to freedom of expression and to intellectual achievement, without any rigid barriers as to what you must write, and what you must say, and what you must do, and what you must paint, which was what was going on in the Soviet Union. I think it was the most important division that the agency had, and I think that it played an enormous role in the Cold War."
what's so ironic?
Well . Now that cats out of the bag, does that mean my Pollock's will lose value???? I mean, they aren't exactly counter cultural icons if the CIA was secretly supporting him...Should I call Sothebys and dump them?
When funding for the arts goes, it is the sign of an intellectually and morally bankrupt society, IMO.
Great civilizations always find a place for the arts, it is what makes us fundamentally human.
I don't care if it *is* a picture of Mohammed, Jesus or Mary sculpted in elephant dung or what have you. Fund 'em anyway. (aaah that is one for the political forum)
If all you want is Normal Rockwell-ish tripe, then you can farm that out to another country where they can't think for themselves. Not that there is anything wrong with Norman's work. That kind of thing has its place and was uniquely American and worthwhile as anything. But it is the kind of simplistic stuff that appeals to certain reactionary elements in our society. For some there is little out there beyond the limited "pretty pictures".
Good question.
If anything the publicity probably helps, I would guess.
Damn, I hope so, but most of the big Pollock buyers lately have been from Mexico and South America and they aren't real fond of the CIA.
Fortunately they didn't cost me hardly anything.
I'm still a few million short on being able to buy and run my dream ranch at the current prices.
Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 12-27-2011 at 08:30 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
