What's the future of arts under Capitalism?

the distinction between Art and Not Art is alien to Late Capitalist society. High Art is a luxury commodity market linked to money laundering and tax evasion. 'High Art' is an hypercapitalistic consumer industry, no different from pornography, tobbaco, fashion, or studio blockbusters. You have the Spectacle and the Negation of the spectacle. points in which the spectacle is punctured, fleeting glimpses of the Whole.

That's been true, any music out today could've come out in 1997, even further back if you exclude Hip Hop, you couldn't say the same about any time in the 20th Century, 1997 music was radically different from 1977 music, and 1927 music was radically different from 1907 music.

All other arts are in the same boat, movies are all remakes, "Modern Art" is paintings from the 50 years ago. TV used to be the saving grace but prestige TV is shit these days.

Soviet art sucked except during Glasnost.

A guy dying of cancer being filmed in exchange for medical treatment.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grote_Donorshow

That's because they were capitalists tho.

Making art takes a lot of time and energy usualy. Yet capitalism demands we devote all our time to consumption and production of commodities.
Therefore, unless your art can become a commodity, you will find yourself with very little free time to create art, between producing and consuming commodities for subsistence.

Oh god..

No, it won't. It's true capitalism doesn't exactly incentivize refinement and experimentation hence why the mainstream is saturated with assembly-line trash, but subcultures always thrive on the margins and sometimes even within the industry against all odds. Every era had its disposable pop and its creative tour-de-forces.

this was staged right
RIGHT?

Yes it was faked to draw attention to the shortage of donors. The donor was an actress but all the candidates were real kidney patients who agreed to play along.

But I am willing to bet we are going to be seeing shit like this in the future. We already parade people around to win money for life saving treatments in social media.

This tbqh. The logic of Capitalism inevitably applies to art as well, and artists and companies are pushed into producing the kinds of art that make them the most profit. The effort and money needed to produce art, as well as the high risk of the sales underperforming, drive companies to look for safe investments, which leads to 'mainstream' high-budget big-audience art to look very similar to each other. Of course, the lower the budget, the more room there is for bad capitalists to ignore all this shit and do whatever, and you'll sometimes get extraordinary cases of these people then becoming extremely popular (after which all the good capitalists copy them).

I remember a DFW essay gave a pretty good formula for explaining that 'more money invested'='a need for safer investment'. It was a great way to explain to an apolitical normie like me (as I was when I read the essay) the inherent ways that capital will destroy creativity.

Blame it on postmodernism and liberalism, its weird that grohl said that considering he writes fairy generic pop arena rock

It wont all become same it's just pop stuff is marketed that way. What is a bigger problem to me is the noise war where studios just keep making music more loud and muddied down

Pop and the genres around it, the heavily commercialized, commoditized stuff, has indeed lost all substance. Pitch and timing correction along with a tendency to only push what is meant to be successful means it really starts to sound the same.

But step out of this into the world of the lesser-known artists and you'll find that music is alive and well. The means of musical production becoming very cheap as well as the net making distribution easy have contributed to a huge creative explosion - admittedly one parallel to capitalism more than within it.

Freedom of expression will be removed and all art will be government regulated so nobodys feelings will be hurt and corporate profits made to suffer because of it.

This.

marxists.org/reference/archive/wilde-oscar/soul-man/

A German comedian also noticed it and produced a song, by letting a bunch of chimps put words together taken from advertisement slogans.
Also this video runs on stock footage, expect for the one he appears in.
It sounds like your run on the mill popsong and manage to climb the charts. I don't know if people either appreciate the irony or if they genuinely think this is a good popsong.

youtube.com/watch?v=h8MVXC_hqNY

The glorious internet piracy revolution will deliver us from commercialized pop culture and restore glorious proletarian folk culture and high art.

i remain naively positive about hip-hop's subversive potential in the mainstream meteor.

even as it has gotten tragically consumed by the corporate label machine, the structure of the artform itself i think fundamentally resists any attempt to ignore class struggle. another user here put this much better than i can, but if, for example. you look at how migos have dealt with their success, we see a group of formerly working class men entering the same economic sphere of white elites, while simultaneously relentlessly embracing the lower class lifestyle they come from. while yes, we can paint the narrative that labels just want to endorse ""turn up music"" and that is why migos are successful, the problem is that even if this is true, i personally think that the group still fundamentally exposes and endorses the black proletarian lifestyle to the mainstream white audience. if you take it seriously, this is a lot of modern hip hop in general, particularly in the trap scene. maybe on the surface we simply get party music, but anyone that's paying attention can see that what is actually happening is the expression of black (which in most cases is to say proletarian) consciousness to the general public.