Racist Countryside Art

[theprestige]

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.)

Darat, do you have any evidence at all of the following propositions?

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”.​

 

[Thermal]

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

OK once again.. you understand we stand that's a vacuous observation, right? You don't know if the comment is valuable or cuckoo...till you've read it. So you have to read it to have any opinion at all. Are we going too fast?

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

OK once again.. You're not really saying anything. Yes, you can ignore super weird signage put in exhibits. You could sit there quietly never thinking of them again. All well and good.

But this is a discussion forum. We discuss ****, including super weird signage. It's kind of what we do. OK once again.. Are we going too fast?

 

[Hercules56]

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

People will be stygmatised and attacked for still enjoying the art even though its clearly racist and evil.

"Why are you looking at this racist art? Don't you understand what landscape art does? Do you approve of this racism?"

 

[Thermal]

Darat, do you have any evidence at all of the following propositions?

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”.​

I would humbly opine that the museum's remarks are not claims needing evidence, but rather more of an op-ed piece. Taken as such, the management has elected to put their dark views about how Brits think on blast. Not realizing many people wouldn't think one follows fromm the other and all that.

 

[Puppycow]

What is the connection to "colonialism" though?

 

[theprestige]

I would humbly opine that the museum's remarks are not claims needing evidence, but rather more of an op-ed piece.

Ah, but some members place high value on calling for evidence to support any opinion posted here that they don't agree with.

 

[Puppycow]

Even op-ed pieces usually try to muster some sort of evidence, don't they?

 

[Thermal]

Ah, but some members place high value on calling for evidence to support any opinion posted here that they don't agree with.

Fair call. The museum staff is a-gonna be doing a little foot shuffling to explain why they think the way they do. Or maybe not. Maybe they'll be all incredulous and say "well of course Brits dislike foreigners".

 

[Puppycow]

I think this painting is kinda racist, what do you all think?

 

[Thermal]

I think this painting is kinda racist, what do you all think?

[qimg]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg/624px-Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg[/qimg]

Makes me just want to illuminate that breathtaking landscape with the burning corpses of immigrants. Who's with me?

 

[Puppycow]

He does at least seem to get the geometry right. (The vanishing point, etc.)

 

[Darat]

People will be stygmatised and attacked for still enjoying the art even though its clearly racist and evil.

"Why are you looking at this racist art? Don't you understand what landscape art does? Do you approve of this racism?"

Again you seem to be very confused - are you aware this is about a huge revamp to the museum’s galleries? These pictures are being displayed, the whole thread is about these pictures being displayed, that they have in March 2024 decided they are important pieces of art that need to be shown? You seem to think this thread is about pictures not being displayed, people being told not to look at pictures?

 

[Darat]

Even op-ed pieces usually try to muster some sort of evidence, don't they?

Yes and no - this is the sort of thing curators put up: …. Pastoral landscapes celebrate the dominion of mankind over nature. The scenes are peaceful, often depicting ripe harvests, lovely gardens, manicured lawns with broad vistas, and fattened livestock. Man has developed and tamed the landscape – it yields the necessities we need to live, as well as beauty and safety….. https://artmuseum.arizona.edu/event...-the-pastoral-the-picturesque-and-the-sublime

I suggest that they would hold that their curation, the pictures they’ve chosen, are the evidence for their narrative.

 

[Hercules56]

Again you seem to be very confused - are you aware this is about a huge revamp to the museum’s galleries? These pictures are being displayed, the whole thread is about these pictures being displayed, that they have in March 2024 decided they are important pieces of art that need to be shown? You seem to think this thread is about pictures not being displayed, people being told not to look at pictures?

These benign pictures of simple landscape will be attacked and stygmatised as being racist, evil, bigoted. Those who enjoy the paintings will also be stygmatised and attacked.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Darat]

I think this painting is kinda racist, what do you all think?

[qimg]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg/624px-Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg[/qimg]

Why?

 

[Darat]

He does at least seem to get the geometry right. (The vanishing point, etc.)

He doesn’t, that window wouldn’t fit into the window gap and frame, the flowers in the vase and few other bits and pieces. He wasn’t a terrible artist but he wasn’t a good one either.

 

[theprestige]

I think this painting is kinda racist, what do you all think?

[qimg]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg/624px-Adolf_Hitler_-_Fruhlingsstrauss_im_Fenster_%281914%29.jpg[/qimg]

I think it better not give those filthy Normans any ideas about crossing the Channel and colonizing Angle lands!

 

[Darat]

These benign pictures of simple landscape will be attacked and stygmatised as being racist, evil, bigoted. Those who enjoy the paintings will also be stygmatised and attacked.

Prove me wrong.

Not up to me to disprove your claim, it’s up to you to prove your own claims.

 

[Puppycow]

Why?

Cuz Hitler painted it. Not reason enough?

I mean, I'm kidding of course. We have to separate the art from the artist.

But isn't that what they're saying essentially? That paintings of landscapes are inherently bad because of who painted them?

 

[Hercules56]

Cuz Hitler painted it. Not reason enough?

I mean, I'm kidding of course. We have to separate the art from the artist.

But isn't that what they're saying essentially? That paintings of landscapes are inherently bad because of who painted them?

No, their comments seem to be about ALL landscape paintings of the British countryside, not just those painted by racists.