#Login Register


  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
Home 


Modern art was CIA Weapon: Pollock and de Kooning were Weapons in a Cultural Cold War!
06-13-2013, 03:30 PM #1
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,283 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
Quote:Modern art was CIA 'weapon'
Revealed: how the spy agency used unwitting artists such as Pollock and de Kooning in a cultural Cold War



For 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.

The connection is improbable. This was a period, in the 1950s and 1960s, when the great majority of Americans disliked or even despised modern art - President Truman summed up the popular view when he said: "If that's art, then I'm a Hottentot." As for the artists themselves, many were ex- com- munists barely acceptable in the America of the McCarthyite era, and certainly not the sort of people normally likely to receive US government backing.

Why did the CIA support them? Because in the propaganda war with the Soviet Union, this new artistic movement could be held up as proof of the creativity, the intellectual freedom, and the cultural power of the US. Russian art, strapped into the communist ideological straitjacket, could not compete.

The existence of this policy, rumoured and disputed for many years, has now been confirmed for the first time by former CIA officials. Unknown to the artists, the new American art was secretly promoted under a policy known as the "long leash" - arrangements similar in some ways to the indirect CIA backing of the journal Encounter, edited by Stephen Spender.
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...78808.html

Octo and I both studied art history in college, when we first met we talked at length about the pretentiousness of these so called "artists".
Pollock & de Kooning were monstrosities in my opinion, and throw in Christo; who is still working the movement like the old worn out whore that he is.
All of these so called "artists" did nothing but make me cringe, and were nothing short of a humiliating kick in the crotch for real artists and those that gravitated toward art history.
I'm so glad this came out - I'm not crazy after all, but rather, TPTB promoted insanity and once again, the sheep ate it up.
Eat your heart out Peggy Guggenheim - your BF sucked like the hokey architecture of your museum that houses his tasteless framed drop cloths.
If this isn't a slap in the face to the pretentious art world, what is? Bunch of fakes. coffeetime.gif

wonder.gif
06-13-2013, 03:37 PM #2
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,612 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
Well well well... fatman.gif

The pretentiousness of it all was the main reason I dropped out of that bullshit. This kind of makes sense of it all. 13.gif
06-13-2013, 03:53 PM #3
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,283 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
It goes a long way to clarify the brutally nonsensical. I'm hoping this (bowel) movement gets dropped from art history classes and textbooks. It is totally without merit.
Moving on to the present day, the question must be asked: Where does Christo get his funding for these countless miles of parachute grade fabric he uses to cover everything his little heart desires?
Who pulls the permits for these moldy environmental abominations? What would happen if I went downtown to that horrible ugly expensive pretentious fountain and covered it in fabric?
I'd be thrown in jail for Christ sakes. gaah.gif
I despise pretentious wannabees.

wonder.gif
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-13-2013, 04:14 PM #4
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
i agree pollock, de Kooning and the more modern
version of this pointless movement in the guise of art
christo are nothing short of a hoax on peoples taste.
06-14-2013, 08:17 AM #5
Cynicalabsurdance Member
Posts:8,261 Threads:191 Joined:Feb 2011
can i blame the C.I.A. for freak of the World Warhol

and todays heinous pop music

because i have searched for an answer as to " Are People really THAT ignorant of the
Arts as to buy this crap ? "

know what

I'd wager it's both

it is a plot

and people are that stupid chuckle.gif
06-14-2013, 09:24 AM #6
White Ribbon call me
Posts:9,779 Threads:371 Joined:Apr 2013
i love Warhol.. my avi is one of his pieces.. but yeah, its not for everyone..
06-14-2013, 09:30 AM #7
White Ribbon call me
Posts:9,779 Threads:371 Joined:Apr 2013
pollocks art is pretty shït..
06-14-2013, 09:55 AM #8
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,283 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
iagree.gif Agreed. As far as Warhol ... he's not for everybody, but I feel he was genuine - in his own very out there way. I can respect him for that alone; but what do I know, I just studied art history like millions of others.
My fave is Salvador Dali.

wonder.gif
06-14-2013, 12:24 PM #9
Accidental Stoner Member
Posts:8,819 Threads:70 Joined:Feb 2011

İmage

Oh, those.



Agree with JR - nobody beats the great Dali when it comes to surrealism.
06-14-2013, 12:38 PM #10
White Ribbon call me
Posts:9,779 Threads:371 Joined:Apr 2013
i like Banksy graffiti art.. its so cool..

İmage

İmage

İmage
06-14-2013, 12:42 PM #11
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,612 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
Me too. I think it's pretty awesome.
06-14-2013, 01:07 PM #12
Accidental Stoner Member
Posts:8,819 Threads:70 Joined:Feb 2011
chuckle.gif

Sweet.
06-14-2013, 01:10 PM #13
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,612 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
Guerrilla art. What's there not to love? chuckle.gif
06-14-2013, 01:11 PM #14
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,283 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
Very cool and a political undertone.

wonder.gif
06-14-2013, 02:56 PM #15
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,898 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
From the little art history I studied, all new forms of expression by artists were usually considered unacceptable if they strayed away from traditional styles. At any rate, I would not include Mark Rothko in this, I really like his work.

These artists' works have withstood the test of time, so, again, art appreciation is a personal thing. And I'm all for free expression in painting.


http://www.nga.gov/feature/rothko/

İmage

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/abex/hd_abex.htm

The CIA most likely did use whatever they would as cultural weapons.



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com