Three Cheeses and the Truth

[3uGH7D4MLj]

Yes, I suppose, thinking about it, this idea of the romanticization of poverty, where "cheese" has its roots, really is quite a universal concept. I blame the Victorians! They seemed to do it quite a lot. But I guess it's been around at least since the concept of the "noble savage" - the romanticization of the unsophisticated.

Anyway, so the point of my OP was: Why do I do this? Why do I apparently mock, sneer at and laugh at the sentimentality of sincerely expressed lyrics? And my conclusion was that perhaps I only think I'm mocking.

Another point about this need to see everything ironically: I think it's a sign of lack of self-confidence. If I can claim that everything I like, I like it in an ironic way then I don't ever have to commit myself to saying whether I think anything has genuine merit.

You're saying that you consciously like country music while disrespecting it. Or you like it because it's sort of goofy and maudlin, maybe cartoonish. I wonder, could an opera lover say the same thing?

I would say that the noble savage idea is related, not quite the same. I'm thinking now of the movie Titanic (forgive me) where the people in steerage were shown as having a much better time than those on the upper decks. It's a cliché really, and the movie plays it to the hilt.

I think your last graph about commitment is right. Ironic immersion is sort of life, light. You know you're just taking things as they come, not getting too invested into anything. Sincerity and integrity are things of the past, it's whatever is in style at the moment. Compare it with late modernism when the Bauhaus artists went to work to save the world, convinced that their design scheme was a boon to humanity instead of just the latest fashion.

For me this is the meaning of postmodernism, the loss of the illusion of human betterment. (going off the topic)

[Steve3007]

You're saying that you consciously like country music while disrespecting it. Or you like it because it's sort of goofy and maudlin, maybe cartoonish. I wonder, could an opera lover say the same thing?

Yes, yes and probably no. I suspect Opera lovers are divided into those who genuinely like it and those who are being pretentious - i.e. they genuinely think that it must have some kind of merit and they want to look intellectual by pretending to know what that merit is. A bit like having "Ulysses" and "In Search Of Lost Time" on your book shelf (I have both) but never reading them (I've read the first page of Ulysses). I don't imagine opera lovers see opera as cheese. Or, if they do, then it is the finest Parmigiano Reggiano.

But, although I think I'm disrespecting country music I suspect that, actually, I'm secretly respecting it. I think country music is a bit like parents. You mock them as a teenager and respect them when you have kids of your own. And that reminds me of what Mark Twain said about his father:

"When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years."

would say that the noble savage idea is related, not quite the same. I'm thinking now of the movie Titanic (forgive me) where the people in steerage were shown as having a much better time than those on the upper decks. It's a cliché really, and the movie plays it to the hilt.

Yes! Good one. I remember those cute little red-haired, freckle-faced Irish children saying something like: "Ah to be sure, mammy, are we going to meet baby Jesus this day?". Or something like that. Probably.

The Simpsons has a really good track record of lampooning these kinds of sentimental cliches very well.

I think your last graph about commitment is right. Ironic immersion is sort of life, light. You know you're just taking things as they come, not getting too invested into anything. Sincerity and integrity are things of the past, it's whatever is in style at the moment. Compare it with late modernism when the Bauhaus artists went to work to save the world, convinced that their design scheme was a boon to humanity instead of just the latest fashion.

For me this is the meaning of postmodernism, the loss of the illusion of human betterment. (going off the topic)

An interesting idea. And a perfectly good direction for the topic to take. I'm sure cheese has run its course by now...

[A Poster He or I]

I like the perspectives on postmodernism and irony expressed in the last few posts. However, I'll throw in my 2 cents and say that integrity per se has nothing to do with any of this. I happen to paint for a living (with much support from part-time employment elsewhere). Long ago, I gave up any attempt to pursue painting as personal expression; instead doing pet portraits, kitchy faux-antiqued bottles, sundries and collectibles, and most recently a series of stock landscapes for tourists sold in local shops under contract. It is my sense of artistic integrity that allows my effort to not be any kind of sell-out. I have simply learned to find my own expression within the confines of what I can get away with for the sake of income. Is this a rationalization? Perhaps, but it doesn't feel like it to me. My ego doesn't require my paintings to be my mirrors.

My point is that artistic expression doesn't have to consitute a statement. And the lack of a statement in an opus doesn't have to imply a postmodernist sensibility. My work is sincere; it simply isn't an expression of my inner self in any self-conscious sense.

[3uGH7D4MLj]

I was thinking of integrity like the modernists had, a big meaning in their lives, humanity advancing toward a utopian future. Or a religious purpose that you live with your whole being. These things are illusions that we've grown out of, and it's a little unsettling. You could call it integrity, or faith, or whatever you want.

You seem to be a little defensive about your art.

[A Poster He or I]

I'd say I'm defensive of my integrity, not my art. I have what you've called a modernist point of view toward integrity. I only hoped to explain my artistic enterprise to show that having no personal investment in the production other than a monetary interest doesn't imply any postmodernist sensibility or lack of sincerity.

[Steve3007]

Poster: I think that really is a very interesting insight into your art and your attitude towards it.

Of course, unless we're wealthy people of independent means, we all have to make a living, and if that living involves something creative we all have to create something for which other people are going to want to part with money. So if I were to accuse an artist of lacking integrity, or selling out, for doing that it would have to be an accusation that is applied to everyone except the very rich. The only people who would escape it would be those who don't earn the money that they spend and don't produce anything that anyone wants.

But I suppose the traditional view of the artist with integrity is of the artist who is willing to live in a state of constant penury because he's determined to plough his own furrow and suffer for his art. Like Van Gogh. Of course, those people are often a burden on those around them. But it often seems to be the case that to be creatively driven you have to be, to some extent, selfish and destructive. You can't be the sort of person who cares too much whether your kids are going to get to eat today!

Anyway, I love the idea that you can genuinely find your own expression and joy by doing kitchy portraits and stock landscapes. And I can see how. At the end of the day, you're still being paid to create something, to do all the tactile activities involved in painting and to employ artistic techniques. If you enjoy art as a technically interesting activity then presumably the subject matter can be irrelevant.

I myself spend a lot of my time writing computer software which is used for purposes with which I don't feel any particular connection (when I'm not procrastinating on here). I'd rather spend all my time messing about writing experimental physics simulations, and the like but the other stuff pays the mortgage. And, regardless of the end-application, the techniques and algorithms used are still interesting. So long as the end-application isn't actually evil (a distinct possibility with software - perhaps not such a danger with art?) but is merely banal, I can live with that.

It links to what I was saying on another thread about the possibly banal subject of supermarket loyalty card schemes. I was speculating on there that the software engineers who hone the algorithms which determine precisely which money-off vouchers are sent to which customers in order to tempt them back probably enjoy the technical challenge. I'm sure I would, even though the end could not exactly be described as noble.

[3uGH7D4MLj]

I'd say I'm defensive of my integrity, not my art. I have what you've called a modernist point of view toward integrity. I only hoped to explain my artistic enterprise to show that having no personal investment in the production other than a monetary interest doesn't imply any postmodernist sensibility or lack of sincerity.

Integrity is a loaded word. It's a high compliment, a little old fashioned. But it can also mean something that simply holds together. I tried to explain what I was meaning by it, I didn't mean to question your integrity in the "good character" sense.

It is interesting though that you brought the art in so quickly. If you were a hedge fund manager you may not have felt the need to do that.

It's also interesting that you have brought up art for tourists, which could be compared possibly to the OPs bringing up country music, three chords and the truth, etc. Is there a touch of irony for you as an artist making art for tourists?

-- Updated May 20th, 2014, 8:51 am to add the following --

would say that the noble savage idea is related, not quite the same. I'm thinking now of the movie Titanic (forgive me) where the people in steerage were shown as having a much better time than those on the upper decks. It's a cliché really, and the movie plays it to the hilt.

Yes! Good one. I remember those cute little red-haired, freckle-faced Irish children saying something like: "Ah to be sure, mammy, are we going to meet baby Jesus this day?". Or something like that. Probably.

The scenes I remember were the below decks dancing and partying contrasted with the stuffy activities on the upper decks -- before the disaster.

[Steve3007]

The scenes I remember were the below decks dancing and partying contrasted with the stuffy activities on the upper decks -- before the disaster.

Yes, I remember them. I guess you could make a case for that theme being biblical, in its origin: "the meek shall inherit the Earth". It's part of a wider theme in our culture's fantasies of the idea that the rich will be made miserable by their own greed and selfishness. The posh people in 1st class are made bitter and twisted by the social climbing and lust for wealth and power that got them there in the first place. The poor Irish peasants are free from such material concerns and are made happy by their innocence.

The Kate Winslett character: Eve, in reverse?

Leonardo De Caprio: Her saviour.

The scene on the front of the ship: She is Jesus and he is the cross. What's that about?

[3uGH7D4MLj]

I guess you could make a case for that theme being biblical, in its origin: "the meek shall inherit the Earth". It's part of a wider theme in our culture's fantasies of the idea that the rich will be made miserable by their own greed and selfishness. The posh people in 1st class are made bitter and twisted by the social climbing and lust for wealth and power that got them there in the first place. The poor Irish peasants are free from such material concerns and are made happy by their innocence.

The Kate Winslett character: Eve, in reverse?

Leonardo De Caprio: Her saviour.

The scene on the front of the ship: She is Jesus and he is the cross. What's that about?

I don't know about your Biblical theory. Those in steerage are certainly not inheriting the earth or prevailing in any way, and they aren't even meek. They are just lower class, with material concerns different from the upper deck people only in scale and degree of desperation. The upper deck people aren't shown having such a bad time if I remember right.

I see it as the romanticizing of poverty cliché and someone trying to make an entertaining movie, but you've got me thinking about it.

[Steve3007]

Yes, I'm sure you're right. And my Biblical analogy was only supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. But it's got me thinking now too!

The Winslett character, as I recall, was actually called Eve, wasn't she? And Eve in reverse is .... Eve!

And the scene on the front of the ship is, I think, startling in its crucifixion imagery.

And the ship contains examples of all strata of human society, just as the Ark contained examples of all strata of the animal kingdom.

Mmmmm.

---

Footnote: I just looked it up. She was called Rose. Bang goes that theory.

I must do some work.

[A Poster He or I]

Steve3007 said: It links to what I was saying on another thread about the possibly banal subject of supermarket loyalty card schemes. I was speculating on there that the software engineers who hone the algorithms which determine precisely which money-off vouchers are sent to which customers in order to tempt them back probably enjoy the technical challenge. I'm sure I would, even though the end could not exactly be described as noble.

From 1990 to 1995, I was a mainframe computer programmer. I loved my job because I could bring my creative energy to work everyday, figuring out how to put algorithms together to support an international logistics company's supply chain. That is the only period in my adult life that I did virtually no painting! My need to create was satisfied.

3uGH7 said: It is interesting though that you brought the art in so quickly. If you were a hedge fund manager you may not have felt the need to do that.

It's hard to be "cheesy," over-the-top, ironic, or to lack sincerity as a successful hedge fund manager. On second thought, I can imagine lacking sincerity as not being necessarily detrimental.

3uGH7 said: It's also interesting that you have brought up art for tourists, which could be compared possibly to the OPs bringing up country music, three chords and the truth, etc. Is there a touch of irony for you as an artist making art for tourists?

I'd say there is a private irony, yes, simply because I'm the only one who knows what I would be painting for myself if I didn't have bills to pay. However, I think the whole "starving artist with his integrity intact" is overrated simply because I know it's possible to be a "commercial artist with his integrity intact" once one comes to terms with the circumstances of one's life and learns to let the ego express itself within the confines of those circumstances.

[3uGH7D4MLj]

3uGH7 said: It is interesting though that you brought the art in so quickly. If you were a hedge fund manager you may not have felt the need to do that.

It's hard to be "cheesy," over-the-top, ironic, or to lack sincerity as a successful hedge fund manager. On second thought, I can imagine lacking sincerity as not being necessarily detrimental.

Hedge fund managers don't make anything but deals. Nothing is produced. They try to get money from other people's pockets into their own. That's the job, and they don't seem to feel the least bit of embarrassment about it.

That's where the real lack of integrity is showing up. All the smart kids who go to Wall St.

Why not design fabulous mass transit, or fabulous education, new antibiotics? Do some good in the world.

My day job is graphic design for book publishers. I sort of pretty things up for the book market. I'm ok with that but I have other outlets. I like to ask people what they do in their spare time, much more interesting than what we get stuck doing for a living.

[A Poster He or I]

Why not design fabulous mass transit, or fabulous education, new antibiotics? Do some good in the world.

I suppose a hedge fund manager can't be considered successful unless he is also making money for his clients. In principle, those clients are in a position to invest their profits in mass transit research, educational grants, and institutional endowments that could lead to new antibiotics. Perhaps this qualifies as producing something "by proxy."

I've known only 2 very wealthy people in my life on a personal level, and both of them took their philanthropic activities pretty seriously, so at least there is a basis for integrity there. As to the measure of that integrity, who are we to say? We cannot crawl into their heads and find out what drives them. Yet I balk at assessing integrity by merely summing up the practical effects of an individual's philanthropy without knowing the motives.

[3uGH7D4MLj]

Why not design fabulous mass transit, or fabulous education, new antibiotics? Do some good in the world.

I suppose a hedge fund manager can't be considered successful unless he is also making money for his clients. In principle, those clients are in a position to invest their profits in mass transit research, educational grants, and institutional endowments that could lead to new antibiotics. Perhaps this qualifies as producing something "by proxy."

I've known only 2 very wealthy people in my life on a personal level, and both of them took their philanthropic activities pretty seriously, so at least there is a basis for integrity there. As to the measure of that integrity, who are we to say? We cannot crawl into their heads and find out what drives them. Yet I balk at assessing integrity by merely summing up the practical effects of an individual's philanthropy without knowing the motives.

Yah but the hedge fund manager is sucking the money up from those below. In the cleverest way he can find. Sorry if I can't get up much respect.

And I am sad that the smart kids are all going to Wall St. Institutional endowments are what is needed for the antibiotics because there's not much money in it. Too short term, the Pharm companies aren't interested.

I wish I'd never used the word integrity. I didn't mean it in this good-character way. I meant that a person doesn't have to cop to a set of assumptions, doesn't have to be integral to a religion or modernism, or any manifesto. Like Andy Warhol said, you can be an abstract expressionist in the morning and a realist or pop artist in the afternoon. That's the kind of integrity or lack, that I meant.