Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Communists wanted to weaken our culture with experimental literature, abstract art, dissonant music, and sexual freedom.

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Linh Thoai

unread,
Jan 5, 2001, 5:57:47 AM1/5/01
to
Communists wanted to weaken our culture with experimental literature,
abstract art, dissonant music, and sexual freedom.
I doubt that many people still hold this uniquely American view, since
Communism has collapsed and the social features in question still thrive
without any assistance from agents of foreign powers. When one used to point
out to the folks who made this argument that all these were strongly
suppressed in most Communist countries and denounced as forms of Capitalist
corruption by them, they would reply that of course the Communists wanted to
keep such filth out of their own lands--the goal was to weaken ours.


This argument is almost too silly to answer, but it worth nothing that in
the very earliest stages of the Russian revolution there was indeed a good
deal of experimental art and music as well as sexual experimentation.
Stalin, however, was far more bourgeois than revolutionary in his artistic
tastes and morals, and suppressed such modernism as severely as did Hitler
on the extreme right.


There were isolated exceptions to this pattern (art and music in Poland,
fiction in Cuba, for instance), but generally where Communism prevailed
there was a stultifying imposition of conservative artistic standards.


Those who used to make this argument probably knew little or nothing about
this history; they simply associated Communism with everything they
disliked. By the 1950s it was already a joke that conservatives would call
anything new a "Communist plot."


Of course, many experimental artists in Western countries became involved
briefly or for longer periods with Communist movements, but in most cases
they were drawn to them because their rebellious artistic tastes naturally
led them to sympathize with revolution itself rather than their politics
having caused their works to become more experimental.


Minh Duc

unread,
Jan 5, 2001, 3:35:30 PM1/5/01
to
Lo+`i le^n a'n Co^.ng sa?n la`m suy ye^'u va(n ho'a ba(`ng nhu+~ng
hi`nh thu+'c nghe^. thua^.t mo+'i, tu+. do ti'nh du.c... cha('c chi?
a'p du.ng cho nu+o+'c My~ no+i ma` ca'c nghe^. si~ co' khuynh hu+o+'ng
tu+. do, ca'ch ma.ng la` nhu+~ng ngu+o+`i thie^n ta?.

Ba`i vie^'t na`y no'i ra^'t chi'nh xa'c la` ta.i chi'nh ca'c nu+o+'c CS
ca'c gia' tri. nghe^. thua^.t co^? ddie^?n ddu+o+.c tra^n tro.ng va`
ba?o to^`n trong khi ddo' la.i le^n a'n ca'c hi`nh thu+'c nghe^.
thua^.t mo+'i nhu+ tranh, tu+o+.ng tru+`u tu+o+.ng. Ngu+o+`i co^.ng
sa?n cu~ng co^' ta.o hi`nh thu+'c nghe^. thua^.t mo+'i cho phe co^.ng
sa?n nhu+ lo^'i nha?y son ddo^' mi`. Kho^ng ha't ba(`ng lo+`i ma` chi?
ha't ba(`ng ca'c no^'t nha.c ddo^, re^, mi, fa, son.... Loa.i ha't na`y
nga`y nay kho^ng tha^'y ai ha't nu+~a. Nhu+~ng hi`nh thu+'c nghe^.
thua^.t na`o kho^ng ddu+o+.c qua^`n chu'ng ta'n thu+o+?ng thi` no'
kho^ng the^? to^`n ta.i ddu+o+.c.

Xe't ve^` li.ch su+? nghe^. thua^.t thi` tu+` tho+`i dda^`u the^' ky?
20 cho dde^'n nay ta.i ca'c nu+o+'c kho^ng CS co' bie^'t bao la` nghe^.
si~ ddem thu+? nhu+~ng loa.i hi`nh nghe^.thua^.t mo+'i. A^m nha.c
cha(?ng ha.n tu+` dda^`u the^' ky? 20 dde^'n cuo^'i the^' ky? dda~ thay
ddo^?i ghe^ go+'m. Ne^'u ca'c nu+o+'c CS co' dde^` ra va`i hi`nh thu+'c
nghe^. thua^.t mo+'i thi` cu~ng chi? la` mo^.t trong muo^n va`n y'
kie^'n ddu+o+.c ddu+a ra trong the^' ky? 20. Nhu+ng ddie^`u dda'ng
pha`n na`n ta.i ca'c nu+o+'c CS la` ca'c hi`nh thu+'c nghe^. thua^.t
na`o ddu+o+.c nha` nu+o+'c cho phe'p thi` mo+'i ddu+o+.c lu+u ha`nh.
Co`n ngu+o+`i da^n thi` kho^ng ddu+o+.c phe'p nghi~ va` thu+? nhu+~ng
ddie^`u mo+'i. Nhu+~ng su+. mo+'i me? ve^` va(n ho'a trong the^' ky? 20
dde^`u dde^'n tu+` ca'c nu+o+'c kho^ng CS. Co`n ta.i ca'c nu+o+'c CS
pha^`n lo+'n thi` chi? ba('t chu+o+'c la.i ca'c nu+o+'c tu+. do..
Nguye^n nha^n la` vi` ca'ch nha` la~nh dda.o CS kho^ng cho phe'p ca'
nha^n ddu+o+.c bie^?u lo^. ti`nh ca?m, ta^m tu+ va` sa'ng kie^'n cu?a
mi`nh mo^.t ca'ch tu+. do. La^'y thi' du., o+? ca'c nu+o+'c kho^ng
co^.ng sa?n, khi co' ban nha.c dde^? to'c da`i thi` nha` nu+o+'c dde^?
ke^. kho^ng can thie^.p, ne^'u qua^`n chu'ng thi'ch thi` no' tro+?
tha`nh mo^'t (va` no' dda~ tro+? tha`nh ca'i mo^'t trong mo^.t tho+`i
gian). Trong khi ddo' ne^'u hie^.n tu+o+.ng na`y pha't sinh trong xa~
ho^.i XHCH thi` bi. chi'nh quye^`n ca^'m vi` cho no' la` ddo^`i tru.y.


In article <LMh56.87736$A06.3...@news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com>,

--
Minh Duc
http://infoweb.magi.com/~minh/index.html


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

0 new messages