Debates between Marxism and Capitalism - Essay Example

The Modern Condition and the Artist's Response: Social and consciousness Introduction Many new technologies and ideas inspired the change thatoccurred in the second half of the 19th century. These ideas, which eventually developed into realities, allowed information to be available to the masses and for mysteries to be explored. The growing cities provided jobs and opportunities which the rural workers left their farms for. All of these changes and new information, although amazing, also brought alienation and anxiety. These reactions to the "conditions for modern art" were examined by the artists of the time and expressed in ways the world had never seen before and have provided a way for us to understand these reactions. In Modern Art 1851-1929 the author, Richard Brettell, says that an obvious but unmediated way that the artist represented the change of their time is by the subject of their work. By painting modern inventions, such as the Eiffel Tower or a lunch at a new cafe in downtown Paris, the artists was recording modernity. Because one abject can be represented in many ways it helps us analyze how the artists felt about the subject. For example, images of the "most important single achievements of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries", or the modern city, were very popular subjects. For the purpose of this essay, we will look at how the question of Marxism and the answer of capitalism - and the results from the debate - have slowly transformed society up until this point, affecting and changing social class and consciousness over time and how these changes have been reflected in art forms. Marxism versus Capitalism Marxism as a whole spurred the onslaught of a different sociological vehicle for governing the masses, a vehicle which contradicted the arguably excessive range of capitalism and what it stood for. By definition then this conflict reflected in art and how the psyche of the collective human race responded to either one or the other. Blamires stated that Marxists saw the chief evil to be eradicated as being the oppression by the capitalists and their allies of the working class (Blamires, pp. 404). Marxism advocated the administration and equalizing of society - all are equal - but failed to take into account the general urge of individuality as experienced by every human being. Due to the competitive and adaptive nature of capitalism, with its emphasis on individuality and the rights of every human, Marxist philosophy and strictures were revealed to be too oppressive, in a grand gesture of irony; human beings desired freedom and unique expression, and a system that regulated and repressed anything that promoted defiance was seen as limiting and unnecessary. Expressing the notion of change, even gradual, was an easy task for the painters and artists of the transitional times between Marxism/communism and capitalism. Painting life and people in current situations was a means of expressing identification, for self and others. Examples of such works would include Manet's 'Un bar aux Folies-Bergre' (The Bar at the Folies-Bergre) or 'Masked Ball at the Opera'. These images depict a changing time and most notably, a gathering of people and a celebration of life in its individualized freedom. By definition then, these paintings can be seen as symbolic of free will and its execution, in rebellion against oppression and repression as defined by the anti-liberal motion of the Marxist embodiment of social norms. Capitalism in itself is not an absolute expression of individuality. There are still classes and regulatory boundaries, but these are more manageable. As Abrams stated, "the older usage of the term 'capitalism' no longer describes the system as it presently functions". This is implied in other forms of art, such as sculpture and architecture. Because of the individualist drive of competitiveness and self-expression as engendered by capitalism, inter-people conflicts based on viewpoints and opinion become a definite occurrence, and are expressed in art forms accordingly. Modernism and postmodernism As evinced by various distinctive views on postmodernism and modernism, art, architecture and literature play a large part in the vehicle of expression. It was generally held by Fredric Jameson that there are four distinct views (Homer, 102). For the purposes here, only two of these will be looked at: the anti-postmodern/pro-modernist and the pro-postmodernist/pro-modernist stances. These two views imply that there was no distinct break, sociologically, between the modernist art movements and the postmodernist ones, but rather a continuation, a flow from one into the other. People who held to these tenets included American critic Hilton Kramer and French philosopher and literary theorist Jean-Francois Lyotard. Jameson also said that each historical period of capitalist production produces its own distinct form of spatiality and each form of spatiality in turn engenders its own aesthetic or specific regime of representation (Homer, 140). We find evidence of this in the notion of art as commodity: Warhol's repetitions with 'Marilyn Monroe', Jeff Koons's forays into the Kitsch movement with sculptures like 'Rabbit', the Bauhaus advent of architecture and the input of artists like Le Corbusier, with regards to commodities like furniture and household items. Such commodities are a signal aspect of capitalism in that they have taken art - paintings, sculpture - a mode of expression heretofore seen as relatively aesthetic in function only, and made it into household items which practically anyone and everyone can afford to have. This kind of proliferation of creativity and ingenuity reflected not only from the artists' works as representational of capitalist association but also on the mindset that capitalism in itself provokes. With regards to architecture and its effects on the modern-day world, we see a clearer picture of the aggressive trend towards class segregation, even in capitalist society. Mike Davis stated that postmodern architecture is a brutal and coercive matter, a representation of the continuous class war/ambition; in effect a polarization into antagonistic spaces (Homer, 167). Within our cities, we find clearly delineated spaces where the architecture is reflective of the standard, class and income of various people. Poorer sections are defined by less attractive, run-down structures, whereas the more economically stable and even wealthy areas are populated by better-looking buildings, cleanliness and an overall suburban glamour that is missing from less affluent regions. In this we see the perpetuation of capitalism as a means of societal impetus, a drive to compete and excel that is demonstrated in the way that structures differ from each other in style and function. The diversity mirrors society and is therefore a mark of changing time, carried through by the constant redefinition of norms and movements, expressed in changing skylines, changing houses and even the construction techniques and pioneering methods which characterize the critically different forms of architecture. A constant level of change has been implemented, immortalizing modern art and all its forms as a face for society. Conclusion The ultimate rejection of ideologies such as Marxism led to the exponential rise of the modern-day cities, populated by people unrestricted by the administrative regulations that Marxism implied. Because of this rejection, art movements freely magnified the situation of the growing masses, expanding from philosophy and notion to practical outputs. This reflection of our societies came to the fore in how artists depicted the world around them, whether it was to paint a social gathering or a well-known place, or to make art into a commodity for the enjoyment of all. These reflections of the individual, seen as emblematic of consciousness, did not do much to erase the notion of alienation and class distinctiveness, but also did not suppress the idea that every single living being had a right to self-expression, and that said expression could be incorporated into the modern-day society that resulted from the transition between modernism and postmodernism. Works Cited 1. Abrams, C. The Language of Cities. New York: Avon Books, 1971. 2. Blamires, C.P., Jackson, P. (ed). World Fascism: A Historical Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO Inc., 2006. 3. Jameson, F., Homer, S. (ed). Marxism, Hermeneutics, Postmodernism. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998. Read More