VCT Philhistines Condemn Cultural Preservationist Activities by Getty
Michel S.
So apparently those uncultured savages at VCT, who have never been known
for their cultural sensitivity, are opposed to the Getty financing the
restoration of a mural in Olvera Street by one of the greatest Mexican
artists of the 20th century, the late David Alfaro Siqueiros.VCT has
always had a problem with cultural context, and here is no different.
They compared this mural with the work of the Progressive Labor Party (
their spelling, not mine ), a local group of Maoist nutcases who have
stirred up trouble around SoCal for years to try to compensate for the
open and deserved contempt that human beings of every nationality and
race show towards them. The PLP are nothing more than a cabal of
overgrown juvenile delinquents who try to stir up trouble, much like
VCT. It is true Siqueiros was a communist, but OTOH he was also one of
the greatest artists of the twentieth century, whose command of
perspective and technique assures him as one of Mexico's most famed
painters of all time. His influence on the arts worldwide is
immeasurable, and transcends the fact that his political ideology was
wrong. Certainly the PAN government of Siqueiros' home town, Cuernavaca,
realises that the importance of his work transcends mere politics
despite the obvious disagreement.( Similarly, the extreme right wing
city government of Nice fully funds artistic activity there because it
realises that the arts draw tourists which make money. A Siqueiros mural
is something that will draw more tourists into the area. ) Los Angeles
should have been proud to have a mural by one of the greats of the
Mexican School here. I have noticed among VCT, a genuine philhistinism
that seems to show no respect nor appreciation for the arts, along with
no sense of humour and no cultural enlightenment. VCT projects the same
cultural insensitivity traditionally associated with that very same
communism that Siqueiros unfortunately wasted most of his life
defending. VCT has been labeled communist for this reason, and it is
ironic that they make the same exact mistakes as something they claim to
oppose. Somehow they seem to be comfortable with the protestant-puritan
ethic's traditional hostility towards the arts, which poisoned life in
America for years. Rather than decry this, why do they not merely come
up with and fund their own mural somewhere ? This would actually take
work and imagination, and those are qualities that VCT does not have.
They are a parasitic cancerous growth that is incapable of producing
anything, and tries to hide behind the worst sort of socalled "
patriotism " as an excuse for the vacancy of their lives. I would not be
surprised if some of the VCTs probably also opposed the murals program
and wished to shut down the NEA. Its creeps like this ( among others )
that have prevented Los Angeles from ever being truly civilised. VCT
and what they represent are part of the problem, not the solution.
Spencer to my knowledge seems to be a bitter, embattled show biz
never-was who wrote a few songs many years ago with his uncle,( I've
listened to wav samples of them which are acailable over the net )and is
steamed up about the industry having passed him by seemingly for good.
His minions conform to a long tradition of lost souls with a cause
expressing hostility to the arts merely for daring to show that there is
more to reality than just a narrow ideology. The irony here is that
communists are the worst offenders for this sort of thing, and the
artist in question was a communist at the time he painted the mural, yet
those who claim to be opposed to communism are acting just like
communists. Los Angeles hardly has so much cultural heritage and
artistic legacy that it can afford to dismiss such an important work. In
fact Los Angeles culture is usually one and the same with the
entertainmnent industry - this is a relatively rare example of a 20th
century cultural landmark in L.A. that has nothing to do with the movie
business. Despite my disagreement with Siqueiros' politics, he is among
my favourite painters of the century and his work packs a strong punch
that is the total opposite of the obscurantism of the Abstract
Expressionists and Informalists, ironically enough many of whom studied
under Siqueiros ( Pollock for example ). Siqueiros did not shirk from
representationalism into obscurity, hermeticism or visual muzak, and his
aesthetic transcends the politics of the day in a way that a Diego
Rivera does not. Bravo to the Getty, and jode a VCT !
Michael Higby
Michel S. wrote:
>
> So apparently those uncultured savages at VCT, who have never been known
> for their cultural sensitivity, are opposed to the Getty financing the
> restoration of a mural in Olvera Street by one of the greatest Mexican
> artists of the 20th century, the late David Alfaro Siqueiros.
Once again, the VCT and their minions demonstrate to us that their drive
is not the issue of illegal immigration, but one that is quite purely
based on hate and against anything that is Mexican and/or Latino. (Baja
Rat's recent racist diatribe against Puerto Ricans, American citizens,
comes to mind.) My understanding is that the mission of VCT is to
tighten the borders, and stem the flow of illegal immigration, from all
countries. What does that have to do with a historic mural, painted
years ago by American citizens?
Granted, I find communism and socialism distasteful, however I would
like to see the mural. Art is art, and its commentary is that of the
artist. In the free market of ideas that our democracy is supposed to
be about, its up to the individual viewer to embrace or reject that
commentary. What is VCT so afraid of?
The mural itself was censored (whitewashed) by the
White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant (the racial/ethnic/religious stock of which
I come from) power structure of Los Angeles of the day. As the
descendants of WASPs myself (which by the way would back then would have
pegged an Irishman like Baja Rat at about the level of chihuahua), I am
ashamed that this happened.
The Getty is a private organization and can choose to pursue whatever
projects it wants. If some donor is offended, they can refuse to give
and/or not visit the museum. I'm glad to see that the Getty is
approaching some aspect of the city's history and isn't solely a brie &
chablis hangout for Westsiders to view the latest Picasso. Art is
supposed to be controversial, and the Getty should be praised for
willing to approach something as such.
The VCT has always claimed that they are not about race. But it looks
like with this, and Baja's views on Puerto Ricans, that the VCT has
exposed themselves for the hate-mongers that they are. Baja's response
to this will only demonstrate that further.
ba...@earthlink.net
In article <3506B8...@pacbell.net>,
mhi...@pacbell.net wrote:
>
> Michel S. wrote:
> >
> > So apparently those uncultured savages at VCT, who have never been known
> > for their cultural sensitivity, are opposed to the Getty financing the
> > restoration of a mural in Olvera Street by one of the greatest Mexican
> > artists of the 20th century, the late David Alfaro Siqueiros.
>
> Once again, the VCT and their minions demonstrate to us that their drive
> is not the issue of illegal immigration, but one that is quite purely
> based on hate and against anything that is Mexican and/or Latino. (Baja
> Rat's recent racist diatribe against Puerto Ricans, American citizens,
> comes to mind.) My understanding is that the mission of VCT is to
> tighten the borders, and stem the flow of illegal immigration, from all
> countries.
Then youre wrong. VCT may not have been founded as a hate group,
but it has become one for what its worth. Tyndall and Lorenz are not only
all over the VCT site but can also be found on " White nationalist " sites
like the British National Party and American Renaissance.
What does that have to do with a historic mural, painted
> years ago by American citizens?
Exactly ! Siqueiros' assistants were all American, and a certain Jackson
Pollock who was among them, wound up becoming one of America's most reknowned
painters of the century, although in my opinion he was responsible for
a large amount of garbage in terms of influencing Abstract Expressionism
and Informalism. However thats beside the point here.
> Granted, I find communism and socialism distasteful, however I would
> like to see the mural.
Communism was an evil philosophy, however it was part of the history of
this almost expired century, and the mural was a key landmark of the art
of the twentieth century. Siqueiros in any estimation would be considered
one of modernism's greats, and his work is found in museums worldwide.
PRI and PAN governments in Mexico can put aside his political views enough
to recognise his immense contributions to Mexico and to culture in general.
Art is art, and its commentary is that of the
> artist. In the free market of ideas that our democracy is supposed to
> be about, its up to the individual viewer to embrace or reject that
> commentary. What is VCT so afraid of?
My sentiments exactly !
> The mural itself was censored (whitewashed) by the
> White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant (the racial/ethnic/religious stock of which
> I come from) power structure of Los Angeles of the day. As the
> descendants of WASPs myself (which by the way would back then would have
> pegged an Irishman like Baja Rat at about the level of chihuahua), I am
> ashamed that this happened.
For many years the Irish carried a bad rep. In fact, Jewish and Italian
gangsters in 19th century America often gave themselves Irish names
because those names were considered to be more appropriate for gangsters!
Carl Sandberg in his biography of Abraham Lincoln wrote that the Irish
lived in conditions just as bad as the slaves in mid 19th century America,
and if the southern politicians had been hip enough they would have
countered the abolitionists by stating the conditions of the Irish in
Boston and New York. Even as late as 1928, Gov.Al Smith of New York's
ethnicity was considered a drawback ( although the main reason why he
lost the presidency was his heavy Brooklyn accent ). Of course the Irish
wound up contributing more to the USA than any other ethnicity in its
history, and succeeded enough that the stereotypes became softened into
affectionate nostalgia ( at least outside of NYC's Hells Kitchen and the
" Westies " ). But the prejudice and stereotypes at one time were very,
very real. BTW many writers and other observers, such as Ron Unz ( the
California GOP's last best hope )have noted the cultural similarities between
Irish and Mexicans,and the Irish were called " the Mexicans of Europe "
long before Salinas went into hiding in the Emerald Isle.
> The Getty is a private organization and can choose to pursue whatever
> projects it wants. If some donor is offended, they can refuse to give
> and/or not visit the museum. I'm glad to see that the Getty is
> approaching some aspect of the city's history and isn't solely a brie &
> chablis hangout for Westsiders to view the latest Picasso.
BTW, Picasso also was a communist for many years as well, and as a result
was banned from Spain for 35 years.
Art is
> supposed to be controversial, and the Getty should be praised for
> willing to approach something as such.
>
> The VCT has always claimed that they are not about race.
At least Spencer claims this - and at least originally Spencer WAS VCT,
despite mentioning a " co-founder ". VCT stonewalls on this as they do
on many issues.
But it looks
> like with this, and Baja's views on Puerto Ricans, that the VCT has
> exposed themselves for the hate-mongers that they are. Baja's response
> to this will only demonstrate that further.
>
Which so far has been absent...
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading