Racist Countryside Art

[Stout]

Q: Why are the pyramids in Egypt?
A: Because they were too big for the British to steal.

 

[Darat]

This seems to go a bit beyond that doesn't it? Basically claiming a more or less boring picture of the country side encourages fascism?

Wouldn't it be a bit odd and noteworthy if the sign in the louvre said something like, "And we stole these from the Greeks!"

I’ve not seen anything that can be described as “encourages fascism”, which quote are you referring to?

 

[ahhell]

I’ve not seen anything that can be described as “encourages fascism”, which quote are you referring to?

An art museum in the U.K. is warning visitors that pictures that depict the pastoral British countryside can trigger “dark nationalist” feelings.

Close enough in my opinion.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Close enough in my opinion.

You’re quoting two words from the gallery?

Here’s a longer sentence from the Torygraph, quoting seven words from the gallery.

“However, in a gallery displaying a bucolic work by Constable, visitors are informed that “there is a darker side” to the “nationalist feeling” evoked by images of the British countryside.”

Of course there is a darker side to nationalist feelings. I don’t know why this is controversial.

The gallery would go into more detail, but we aren’t shown that, thanks to the joys of clickbait culture.

 

[Lithrael]

To me it feels a lot like if one guy pointed at some beautiful art and said 'weirdly enough, sometimes propaganda can be beautiful, and sometimes beautiful things can be used as propaganda' and other people went 'oh so you're saying beautiful things are bad? You're saying if I like beautiful things like this, I might as well be a facist? Well! What a world you wish to live in!'

'that's not what I said'
'yes it is!'
'no it isn't'
'yes it is'

It could go on like this for forty more pages.

 

[Lithrael]

I'm thinking that is unnecessary and takes away from the experience.

OK once again.. nobody will make you read the signs.

The presentation can be good or bad and a sign with neat insight might improve your experience at the gallery but, personally, even a sign going 'this statue is the greatest work of Peitro Galvani but he had a migraine the whole year he was carving it and he developed an addiction to kicking cats, so if you liked this statue and you also like cats, we want you to know we think you're a ******* hypocrite' would not genuinely take away from my experience of viewing the art. I'd just figure the curator was grinding a weird axe

 

[Lplus]

You’re quoting two words from the gallery?

Here’s a longer sentence from the Torygraph, quoting seven words from the gallery.

“However, in a gallery displaying a bucolic work by Constable, visitors are informed that “there is a darker side” to the “nationalist feeling” evoked by images of the British countryside.”
Of course there is a darker side to nationalist feelings. I don’t know why this is controversial.

The gallery would go into more detail, but we aren’t shown that, thanks to the joys of clickbait culture.

The contorversial part is the suggestion that images of the British countryside do actually invoke nationalist feeling.

OK once again.. nobody will make you read the signs.

The presentation can be good or bad and a sign with neat insight might improve your experience at the gallery but, personally, even a sign going 'this statue is the greatest work of Peitro Galvani but he had a migraine the whole year he was carving it and he developed an addiction to kicking cats, so if you liked this statue and you also like cats, we want you to know we think you're a ******* hypocrite' would not genuinely take away from my experience of viewing the art. I'd just figure the curator was grinding a weird axe

And is the suggestion that images of the British countryside invoke nationalist feeling a weird axe to grind?

 

[Darat]

Close enough in my opinion.

All political ideologies in extreme cases could be described by those two words, from communism to fascism to liberalism. Why are you saying they are talking about fascism?

 

[Darat]

To me it feels a lot like if one guy pointed at some beautiful art and said 'weirdly enough, sometimes propaganda can be beautiful, and sometimes beautiful things can be used as propaganda' and other people went 'oh so you're saying beautiful things are bad? You're saying if I like beautiful things like this, I might as well be a facist? Well! What a world you wish to live in!'

'that's not what I said'
'yes it is!'
'no it isn't'
'yes it is'

It could go on like this for forty more pages.

Totally disagree.

It could on for multiples of 40 pages.

 

[Darat]

OK once again.. nobody will make you read the signs.

The presentation can be good or bad and a sign with neat insight might improve your experience at the gallery but, personally, even a sign going 'this statue is the greatest work of Peitro Galvani but he had a migraine the whole year he was carving it and he developed an addiction to kicking cats, so if you liked this statue and you also like cats, we want you to know we think you're a ******* hypocrite' would not genuinely take away from my experience of viewing the art. I'd just figure the curator was grinding a weird axe

This.

 

[Darat]

The contorversial part is the suggestion that images of the British countryside do actually invoke nationalist feeling.


And is the suggestion that images of the British countryside invoke nationalist feeling a weird axe to grind?

They have been used to invoke nationalist feelings. Art has and still does play a huge part in the stories nations tell themselves and tell others. Surely that's not a controversial idea? (ETA: I'd say today given the ability of us all to potentially share with literally billions of other people and the amazing democratisation of creativity that is happening it will only become more prevalent than ever. It used to be a tool that was pretty much limited to the rich and powerful.)

As to the weird axe or not assesment, no idea yet given how little we know about the notes and labelling.

 

[Lplus]

They have been used to invoke nationalist feelings. Art has and still does play a huge part in the stories nations tell themselves and tell others. Surely that's not a controversial idea? (ETA: I'd say today given the ability of us all to potentially share with literally billions of other people and the amazing democratisation of creativity that is happening it will only become more prevalent than ever. It used to be a tool that was pretty much limited to the rich and powerful.)

As to the weird axe or not assesment, no idea yet given how little we know about the notes and labelling.

This is John Constable's art - when did you last see his art used for propaganda?

Come to that when did you last see any pastoral landscape used as propaganda?

 

[Darat]

This is John Constable's art - when did you last see his art used for propaganda?

Come to that when did you last see any pastoral landscape used as propaganda?

Propaganda? That seems a goal post move.

 

[Hercules56]

This is John Constable's art - when did you last see his art used for propaganda?

Come to that when did you last see any pastoral landscape used as propaganda?

You just don't get it.

Nazis and White Supremacists will see landscape art of their country as something to make them proud, feel a sense of joy and pleasure that their country is beautiful. Therefore such art must be isolated and labeled as the evil art that it is. Because we cannot have people looking at pretty natural scenes of their country, its to dangerous.

 

[Lplus]

Propaganda? That seems a goal post move.

I quote you

They have been used to invoke nationalist feelings.

A deliberate attempt to affect the feelings of a populace towards their own country?

Sounds like propaganda to me.

 

[Hercules56]

"The Fitzwilliam Museum has suggested that paintings of the British countryside evoke dark “nationalist feelings”.

The museum, owned by the University of Cambridge, has undertaken an overhaul of its displays, in a move that its director insisted was not “woke”.

The new signage states that pictures of “rolling English hills” can stir feelings of “pride towards a homeland”.

However, in a gallery displaying a bucolic work by Constable, visitors are informed that “there is a darker side” to the “nationalist feeling” evoked by images of the British countryside.

It states that this national sentiment comes with “the implication that only those with a historical tie to the land have a right to belong”.



Wow, clearly these evil landscape paintings must be isolated and/or have lots of commentary next to them to explain how evil and racist European landscape art is, and how it can be easily manipulated towards nationalist and racist agendas.

 

[Lplus]

You just don't get it.

Nazis and White Supremacists will see landscape art of their country as something to make them proud, feel a sense of joy and pleasure that their country is beautiful. Therefore such art must be isolated and labeled as the evil art that it is. Because we cannot have people looking at pretty natural scenes of their country, its to dangerous.

"The Fitzwilliam Museum has suggested that paintings of the British countryside evoke dark “nationalist feelings”.

The museum, owned by the University of Cambridge, has undertaken an overhaul of its displays, in a move that its director insisted was not “woke”.

The new signage states that pictures of “rolling English hills” can stir feelings of “pride towards a homeland”.

However, in a gallery displaying a bucolic work by Constable, visitors are informed that “there is a darker side” to the “nationalist feeling” evoked by images of the British countryside.

It states that this national sentiment comes with “the implication that only those with a historical tie to the land have a right to belong”.



Wow, clearly these evil landscape paintings must be isolated and/or have lots of commentary next to them to explain how evil and racist European landscape art is, and how it can be easily manipulated towards nationalist and racist agendas.

Yeah, I know, it's pathetic self flagellation really.

Now, pictures of sturdy factory workers wielding hammers I can see as being propaganda, but a cart in a river?

 

[Hercules56]

Sometimes pretty landscape art is just pretty landscape art.

These museum folks need to get a grip.

 

[Stout]

I’ve not seen anything that can be described as “encourages fascism”, which quote are you referring to?

Nationalism is frequently associated with White Supremacy and Fascism. I don't really need to explain this, do I?

Right now, this is about laughing at stupid stuff posted on the internet but in an authoritarian freakshow of a country like Britain (where you can be arrested for posting the lyrics to a rap song on Instagram) you might consider being careful of who sees that landscape hanging in your hallway.

 

[Hercules56]

.....paintings of the British countryside evoke dark “nationalist feelings”.

.....pictures of “rolling English hills” can stir feelings of “pride towards a homeland”.

.... “there is a darker side” to the “nationalist feeling” evoked by images of the British countryside.


.....this national sentiment comes with “the implication that only those with a historical tie to the land have a right to belong”.




Get....a....grip....people.

Its just landscape art.