Re: Art

[Ian Willmore <ianw@xxxxxxxxx>]

In m-d no 5921 Tom O Lincoln wrote: "In genuine art, there will always be 
something for
revolutionaries to value."

Is this true? I have a personal weakness for Italian futurism, even though many 
leading futurists
ended up backing Mussolini. Were they genuine artists, and if so what was there 
for revolutionaries
(or even soggy social dems like me) to value in their work?

Incidentally, John Cleese is a Liberal Democrat in British political terms - 
and was an early backer
of the right winf Social Democratic Party that split from Labour in the early 
1980s. Other Monty
Python alumni were more left-wing. Terry Jones, for example, wrote some very 
sharp and funny stuff
about the official lies told in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. Cleese is 
also interested in
psychoanalysis, and I think Basil Fawlty in particular was a brilliant study in 
frustrated rage - he
would sometimes almost literally melt down in his frustration. I agree that 
this could be quite
painful to watch, but good comedy often is - as those who have seen Ricky 
Gervais' magnificent "The
Office" will agree.

By the way - to move to US pop culture - is Buffy the Vampire Slayer genuine 
art? If so what do
revolutionaries value in it? I love it, but I can't help feeling guilty about 
it ...