Holla Forums can you please tell me why most artists are so painfully liberal?

Why do you expect people with no ties to the Old Order to produce traditional art?

It is because the establishment is governed by Cultural Marxism and so are most distribution companies and venues. Even Crowd-funding companies are hold by SJWs. When PEGIDA's song became a hit-success: aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/amazon-donates-proceeds-anti-muslim-song-refugees-151231130635136.html

But the tides are turning obviously at least in Europe, I can feel it.

Fuck this man, Hail Hydra!

lol try again. Hitler should have worked with King Michael I instead of with the retarded Antonescu. Because he didn't King Michael couped Antonescu when Antonescu held all the cards and Romania turned to the Allies.

King Caroll II was the retard who ran away with his illegitimate Jew wife and also the one who had Codreanu killed and his Legionaries suppressed.

madmonarchist.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/monarch-profile-king-michael-i-of.html

There are plenty of reactionary artists languishing in obscurity because only those conforming to the ideals of the (((chosen))) are granted success. I know I can't be the only one with more creative than practical skills who has arrived at an understanding of the supremacy of European traditionalism.

One of the most important things you can do to help our cause is trawl around for local artists that are on our side to whom you can give your patronage. After all, isn't the uplifting of the talented and righteous a duty of the noble ones?

the bitch wrote some children's book about magic, autistic adults with brain damage of the amygdala tend to be liberal, and since they are here biggest fanbase, guess what a moneyhungry slut is going to do?

Reminds me I have to throw away all my HP books

I am a reactionary artist, here are some of my creations. It's not easy to survive in this culture war.

Artfag here. Generally any right leaning artists get ran out of the University system because uni art depts are pozzed as fuck. Also the kikes run all of the galleries and museums and only promote leftists. Many right leaning artfags end up going into commercial art instead (FX industry, gaming industry, etc). There aren't many right wing artists to begin with though because right wingers always mock you and shame you if you even think about pursuing an art career.

Consider the following: When you were a child, where was your father? If he was present in your life it's no shame to you, simply a sign of the times. A number of people didn't have a father figure in their childhood when they were growing up, he was probably working to provide the means for you to live. You also probably spend less time with him than you do the television or a book or some other influential figure, such as a teacher.

These surrogate parents are often provided a means of living comfortably by social influence, by basically parroting the things that they're supposed to say about such matters, or at least staying quiet about it if they don't agree. After all, you don't want to be like Bobby Fischer or Gary Oldman, do you? You don't want to be heard mouthing off about the Jews like Mel Gibson did, do you?

Take Anthony Hopkins as an example, the man who played Hannibal Lector and the All-Father in the Thor movies. He's carefully made a living in acting without voicing an opinion in any real or significant way for over fifty years. He treats it as a job, and nothing more.

But few men are able to resist the siren call of the media, an open ear that can open many more to their opinion on any number of matters. It takes an iron will to do nothing when there's so much temptation to simply speak about whatever's on your mind.

But to address your actual question, the reason you see a plethora of this shit is because there's a filter in place, and it selects for the opinions that best reflect what the common actor is surrounded by.

I was very much an artist as a teenager. As I've gotten older and watched Millennials reach adulthood themselves, I've really lost the desire to have anything to do with that world. All of these little bastards are so fucking OBSESSED with deviant sexuality, and playing the tiny violin concerto of brown people. It makes me sick.

I saw how outnumbered I was, how little of what matters in the art world is based on technical skill or knowledge, and how much is dependent on having the right friends and the right opinions. The whole thing is nauseating.

Typically these artists are not popular because of putting out great work, but rather because they know who to suck up to.

Liberals are often more than eager to virtue signal by throwing money at things, so artists sucking up to them can make quite a bit doing so.

Sucking up to conservatives doesn't work as well because conservatives don't try so damn hard to signal that they are consuming a particular product or that they're better people because they like some artist.

As well you have the fact that artists deal with the same PC cultural we all do. If they voice some opinion that is vaguely conservative then they could be dealing with a lynch mob the next day. Even being supported by readers who are of the wrong politics can result in authors feeling the need to prostrate themselves before Marxist masses.

honestly that is just funny, a 'rabid coyote', what a shit insult. also with the all caps

how is this fucking hack even famous? his stories are shit tier compared to lovecraft

I honestly have no idea. Why does a singer or actor from Hollywood get so buttblasted over Brexit? How does it even effect them really? I've never seen such collective butthurt over a vote in a country half way around the world.

Because artists/actors/celebrities don't live in the real world, they live in little bubbles of fantasy.

Isn't that a moonman line?

Because, they are dogmatics in a sense.

Lets turn down the Holla Forums sophistry and polemics here for a sec.

This really is not 'muh feelz' and a bunch of overly emotional half wits we are talking about. These are human beings who have risen, in the case of celebrity artist, to the top of an extremely competitive profession. They have made sacrifices in many cases, a few have also developed quite a lot of mental discipline in the refining of their crafts. So we can't simply write them off as overly emotional wet paper bags filled with snowflakes.

These people are dogmatics, and as such, are opposed to what they BELIEVE should be the problem, not what actually are the problems and their root causes. It is much easier to walk a straight and very easy moral line when reducing the complexities of the world to black and whites. These are not defective, or bad people per say, they are just mortal people wanting to be good, but not having the inclination or courage to find out what being the 'good guy' really takes in a very flawed world of greys.

They just put out an opinion to keep their names relevant, and of course they know which opinions are sanctioned. In the most extreme cases they are actually contracted to spout off such opinions. Then of course there are the ones that have been fully brainwashed rather than just being traitors.

Because most of them wouldn't be artists in the first place if other liberals hadn't convinced everyone that there's no point in having standards

Stephen King confirmed for sleeper cell Holla Forumsster.

Artists are liberal because they don't have real jobs. Having a real job forces people to come to grips with the realities of economics in order to survive. If someone is able to sit in their ivory tower and have other people take care of them, their minds begin to fester and generate ideas which would be very quickly tossed aside if they lived in the real world (e.g. colleges).

For most of human history, entertainers have been given about as much respect as they deserve: little to none. People typically idolize those who are rich and successful, because they want to be like those people themselves. It wasn't until recently with the advent of (((mass media))) that entertainment was able to become a huge transnational, and later multinational, industry. This catapulted otherwise obscure actors/musicians/etc into the minds of the general public, and gave the illusion of glamour for merely being associated with art. Because Joe Normalfag doesnt know who the writers/producers/crew behind his favorite show are, he treats the actors as representing the entire experience, and even the entire entertainment industry. Wealth/glamour => respect => people listening to them.

Wha?! Have you seen his Twitter? He is poz as fuck.

The simple and most obvious answer is money. 99% of artists and musicians are dirt poor and want the government to support them for making bad decisions. Hence always voting for liberal gibmedats.

Between that and the college indoctrination/mental issues/drug use, these types will always swing left.

more or less this. Art only exists through societies that are in states of prosperity and security. When humans are so efficient at taking care of basic needs, in leisure they will come up with creative outputs like art. When you have a society at this level of prosperity long enough to generate a whole class of people devoted to the 'arts', then you have a society where many of the people take for granted all the work, the tough decisions, and harsh facts of reality faced on order for society to get there. Without that knowledge, those people turn towards what we call "leftist" ideas of how the world works and how it should work. Artists as a class are just probably the most consistent bloc of leftist in this regard.

I find it hilarious that one of the richest authors in human history seems to believe she's actually a poorfag.

Real artist care for nothing but beaty adn the mastery of their craft, they seek nothing but exelecne in worth and even when said work is lacking they still respect the author if the work shows their devoted dedication to their artistic disipline, a real artis loves his work from the bottom of his heart.

All the artist nowadays are nothing but pretentious sonbs who think themselves superior to the masses because they find value in media hyped garvage deboid of any real merit or worth and who think that their ability to sell the most retarded political messages in the most insidiously subliminal way possible is a better skill than the avility to represent beauty and isnpire emotion in the eyes of the beholder

Here are two reasons

Then

Bowden said that nearly all true artists can be found on the fringes of the political spectrum. Artists aren't really drawn to centrist positions.

We have, for instance, Pound, Eliot, Hamsun, Celine and many others.

At least we have Garrison on our side.

Artists generally rely on patrons (prostitution essentially) and in many places the patron is the state. They hate brexit because they lose gibs.

Programming on MPBN has been underwritten by…

Harry Potter is shit tier and shit tier art is degenerate art. This is the real problem. Modern 'artists' are just degenerates. That said, artists tend to be less right wing, even if they are right wing. This is likely due to the fact that art is an emotional subject, and that since so many artists are already left wing, aspiring artists are influenced by them to also become left wing.

Why are people who are heavily influenced by media liberal?

castaliahouse.com/

Mine was an account and gladly took time from auditing to play Monopoly or play catch.

One of the reasons I don't have kids yet is because I saw how seriously he took the job.

Greg used to work for municipal government as an artist, until the legbeards showed up.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Elliott

Because art today is only about showing the correct opinions. If your art is leftist and "revolutionary" then it is considered good.

Same reason "good" authors are liberal. This was never true in the past, but the only ones who receive good reviews today are the leftist ones.

In her case it was actual prostitution. The books suck.

Most prostitutes in UK weren't poor to being with anyway. It's not like they were forced into prostitution because they got laid off from their sweat shop factory work. They are just sluts who found they could make more money with less work by being a whore than being a waitress.

Liberal degenerate art? yep
Non-degenerate art? nop
Rowling is a puppet herself, she has to appeal to those who got her shit out else right now this beautiful, lovely and calculating single mom would be somewhere in a ditch

You and I are in the minority, then.

It's a sad story that gets repeated a lot. "Dad wasn't there," or something similar.

As an aside, you may wish to get started soon. You may think you're doing the right thing, but a delayed parenthood can cause issues with the offspring. Good luck.

Harry Potter were such shit books anyway.

Voldemort did nothing wrong.

Try getting work as an overtly right wing artist. You'll be slaughtered by the media and stonewalled by the industry. Unless you have access to right wing friendly publishers, media and events, you're not going to make a cent.

Artists can be as far left as they like because the media enshrines their political dogma, and criticizing it will have you blacklisted for breaking ranks no matter how soft and moderate you might be.

This is why artists and entertainers who aren't overtly left wing try to keep their mouths shut because they just want to be able to eat.

The only way you can be "right wing" in art is to be so postmodern that you end up coming off as right wing.

Asking why artists are left leaning is like asking why (((Hollywood))) is left leaning. Owned by kikes, impossible to get ahead in the business if you have a dissenting opinion, etc.
This stuff should be self explanatory by now.

Support non-pozzed artists then. They do exist. Make the deliberate choice to support good work, but don't support shit just because it's red pilled.

There is a recent trend that is entirely right wing in art, and that is the "local" and " artisan" trend. Most of the people who are into it are left wing faggots, but the idea itself of patronizing artisans over mass produced crap is very right wing.

The jew pushed him hard in the 80's and 90's, he was the equivalent of Harry Potter to my generation. Pure coincidence that he turned out to be a zombie for jewish causes.

Copypasta time, I think.

It is important to understand the following:
Art was redefined: “The world around us, in all its imperfections, is actual beauty.”
The implications of this are as follows:
1. Since the real world is “beautiful” (no exceptions), everything can be art, no matter how ugly it is.
2. Since anything can be art, skill is not necessarily required.
3. Everyone can claim to be an artist, by virtue of 2.
4. Since everyone can be an artist–even without skill–the art pieces produced are naturally ugly.
Modern “art” is not art. It is instead a competition to see who can be the ugliest or mundane. The experiment failed. Nothing of value is produced, and it is often utter revulsion to our senses. Where is the value in that? Perhaps it will end like it would have ended hundreds of years ago: by tearing those troll attempts down off those walls and burning them into the ashes they deserve to be.

~:~

I’m an art dealer. Let me explain how these things work.
Shlomo Shekelstein is an art dealer. He persuades his friends, Chaim Yidgold and Abe Kikenberg to buy works by an up-and-coming young artist for $2 million each on the understanding that they will be a good investment.
Over the next few years, Shlomo uses his position to hype the artist. He hires people to write about him in academic journals, organizes exhibitions, ‘helps’ him win prizes, etc. He puts some of the artist’s works into auctions and bids the prices up with the help of friends. He’s buying from himself, so the only cost is the auctioneer’s commission.
Ten years later, Chaim and Abe own works that are worth, on paper, $10 million. Chaim has just pulled off the real estate deal of a lifetime and made a huge amount of profit. Unfortunately, he owes the IRS $10 million. He decides to donate the painting to his local modem art museum. The trustees are happy to state its value as $10 million. The IRS accepts the valuation and allows Shlomo to write off his $10 million tax bill. He is now a noted philanthropist and he gets a wing of the museum named after him.
Meanwhile, Abe isn't doing so well. He needs cash, quick. He can’t sell his painting on the open market because it isn’t worth very much without Shlomo manipulating the price. Abe goes to his bank and asks for a loan, using the painting as collateral. The bank wants an independent assessment of its value, so they ask the world expert on this particular artist–Dr. Shlomo Shekelstein. The good doctor confirms that, based on previous auction prices, it’s worth $10 million. The bank agrees to lend Abe 70% of the value–$7 million.
Now Chaim has saved himself $10 million and Abe has got himself $7 million to play with, all for an initial outlay of $2 million.
My brother works for the police, but I'm pretty sure I've seen more fraud and money laundering than he has.

You can literally put a rock you found in the parking lot on a pedestal and you’ll have some hipsters and art snobs circling it, stroking their beards and contemplating what it means. If you’re placed in an atmosphere of “art” and you’re told it’s art, and it confounds you because you know it’s not art, you begin to wonder why it’s art and… could it actually be art? Next thing you know you’re confounded, coming up with your own answers and getting a circlejerk from critics and the artist talking about nothing but their own autofellated egos until someone buys that rock for $2300.
That’s the game you play in the art world. So either be honest to your beliefs, bust your ass, and try your best to produce the best quality art you can, or be another one of those assholes. Also, there’s a section of New York City with literally 200 art galleries within a single square mile. All of them are shit. This guy’s just so egotistical and retarded that he caught the attention of some article. People don’t get big in New York City; they go to New York City after they already got big.
Also, another important factor in what makes art “work” is the time period during which the art was made. Back when everything was all about traditional beauty and it was all looking same-ish, someone went and put a toilet he found on a wall and introduced the concept of seeing the artistic beauty in things we design for practicality and never really appreciate the form and aesthetic for the very thing we piss in.
That was huge when it first happened. Nobody had done it before, and it was done at the right time.
But now if you put a toilet on the wall or something similar, you’re just some asshole pretending to be deep and doing what has already been done. Sometimes a shifty, lazy gesture can hit the right chord at the right time, and during that one specific moment, you created something deep that resonates with people. But take it out of that context and remove the original intention, and suddenly people don’t get why it was such a big deal.
It’s like reading Gulliver’s Travels without understanding the era and missing out on all the satire’s context, so instead of a brilliant time piece of criticism in literature that snuck past the censors, you’re reading it as a wacky adventure novel with kooky shit going on.
The master artists of antiquity will always be better at the craft technically, but those who first dripped paint on a canvas and sold it with conviction and became famous for it were just doing the right thing at the right time. Those who follow it out of the concept are simply posing and misunderstanding WHY people liked it when they liked it.
There’s just a lot of clueless people in the art world.
There was no proof beyond the arguments themselves, and I didn’t save any of them, but on all the threads, after long debates, everyone came to the same conclusion: the “abstract bullshit no-skill museum art” plaguing the contemporary art world is either a scam to trick retards and get rich without effort or a staged money laundering network. After being exposed, the abstract faggots either started to flood the threads or reply with just “LALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU, YOU DON’T KNOW SHIT.” Their anal frustration went as far as to delete the thread and open a new one, starting the argument again but acting as if the previous one never happened; obviously no one would want to repeat themselves again in a topic already discussed intensively, that’s why most people here just ignore you. These displays of immaturity and idiocy only provide further evidence that you were at a loss for an argument.

The establishment doesn't want anything besides modern art to exist. It’s an extension of Cultural Marxism–the desire to make everything relative–including things like beauty, morality, ethics, and eventually even facts. What is “truth” is not what is true, but rather what feels good and is supported by the state.
Source: Me. I’m an award-winning international poet. I’ve been published in anthologies and collections before. The established art community does not want traditional art communities existing. Progressive liberals killed the traditional art scene by withholding funding. They strangled us out. Things like literature societies and art appreciation groups by definition run on a deficit. We need donations to stay alive, be they monetary gifts or people donating their time by volunteering.
Without the former, the latter can only keep the doors open for so long. Our entire literature society, which spanned the entire state and was nearly as old as the United States, closed its doors for the last time almost ten years ago because the people in power didn’t want to give money to us anymore.
The party politick has assassinated and strangled more good from this world than even you dare to know. However grim you think the situation is, I assure you: the truth is worse. The story changes every day, but time and time again, the ending and the villain remain the same.
The art world did not go quietly into that good night. We waged a war. And we lost. The fact that you’ve never heard about it should tell you just how bad things truly are. Put a gun in the hands of every disenfranchised artist, disillusioned poet, disgusted musician, and despairing writer, and that alone would be an army unto itself. We were divided, and in our division we were routed out of our very halls and homes. There was no song to commemorate the death of traditional beauty in this world, no painting to record our bitter tears to canvas or writing to commit our suffering to paper. There was no grand stand or final fight. Our wells were poisoned, our houses seeded with lice and worms, and our very bread denied us. They routed us and salted the earth as they went.
Do you fear when the day comes that there will be none to beat the drums or sound the horns? That there will be no man who will draw up a painting, rosin a bow, or brandish a trumpet in glory to the nation? Does doubt ever hound your conscience that you weep alone in the darkness, and that no other man would dare put to paper the names of the villains of this world?
You would be wrong. Your suffering is the suffering of thousands, of tens of thousands, of millions. We outnumber them ten to one at least, including their pseudointellectual patsies, degenerate opportunists, and skillless parasites. They are the tide and we are the sea. And when the day comes that the lone wolves awaken and become the pack, there will be such songs sung that would make men of iron weep, and hearts of stone bleed.
The lies are faltering. The dawn is breaking. We will have our due.

I have a bachelor of arts. Majored in art history. And I happily work with my hands doing camp maintenance.
I hated everyone in my department. To this day, symbolism as a concept makes my blood boil. No, your badly painted vagina does not represent the plight of middle eastern dirt farmers. Just shut the fuck up. It represents a fucking vagina. That’s it. And not even well.
I spent days in the sculpture hall hand carving an entire tree into a dragon. Every scale was chiseled by hand (I ran out of time, thus the unfinished tail). Come the senior “exit gallery” and what sat beside my painstaking labor? A crude sculpture of a guy sucking himself off.
Fuck artists. Every single one of them. When someone calls me an artist, I get offended. That’s the equivalent of calling me a drooling retard.

Orwell and Huxley both predicted a dystopia, but their visions differed. In Orwell’s, grave injustices and the burning of books were carried out to hide the truth from the population–to keep them sedated and under control. But in Huxley’s, the world was the way it was because the people changed it to be that way. It was the future they chose, not the war they lost.
Orwell’s dystopia is based on the great lie of the elite few–a tyranny that is enforced. Huxley’s is based on the sweeping ignorance of the many–an apathy that is accepted. And of the two of them, only one is likely to come to pass. You don’t win by hiding the truth, because the truth will always eventually come out in the end.
They are not going to destroy art because it is evil or wrong. Oh, no. They couldn’t get away with it if they tried. What’s going to happen is the destruction of existing art will become known as art. Artists will take hammers to David and lighters to the oils of Rembrandt and Van Gogh and they will call the ashes and rubble “neomodern artistic expression”.
Beauty itself will become a sin in a world that pretends that sins are silly, an evil in a world that claims there is no such thing as good or evil. Light itself will become a taboo because that which lives in the dark does not want to see its own face and works–to know its own inadequacies.
You are seeing this already, are you not? Look around you–at the things that people are saying and doing. Really look and really listen to what they are trying to tell you. Ugly people should become models. Shit in a can and stacks of bricks on a toilet seat are valid art. It’s okay if buildings and architecture are function-only with no form or beauty. Square monoliths of concrete, boxes of glass, and scars of asphalt are acceptable. We don’t need trees and grass and flowers; we don’t need curves and stone and color. Tear down that hundred year old oak and put up a billboard about environmentalism awareness in its place. Bulldoze over those wooden pubs and family-owned farmers markets to make way for a supermarket made of concrete bricks painted grey.
Big Brother isn’t born because he is forced upon the unwilling. He is born because the shortsighted demand security in exchange for their freedoms. His presence is asked for, not invited in.
Do you want the whole world to be a giant box of concrete, glass, and steel? Do you want art to mean nothing? For the “artist” to simply be someone who promotes themselves as an image or a brand, like a company trying to sell you hair dye or penis enhancement pills?
Gamergate started a fight for ethics in gaming journalism.
If it survives long enough, it will become one side in a war for beauty and western civilization itself.

Because being a liberal is easy, and not being liberal or going against the narrative can make you end up like Mel Gibson.

The Banishment of Beauty
youtube.com/watch?v=5tMtV5p0s4E

It's easier to rent-seek under a liberal regime than a conservative one, and artists are about 70% rent seekers (the other 30% are involved in making major media that actually makes money).

Nonsense. Most artists are not liberal, most ARTSCHOOLS are libtard though.

Don't worry though, nobody coming out of Evergreen is ever successful, and have no capability of interacting with people outside of their own cliques.

And I'm an artist…. OK, I'm a polymath, I do just about fucking everything, but half of my income comes from painting murals and carving antler and such.

Oh, and here's a joke. How do you tell a libtard artist from a real one?

-.- the libtard is starving.

Ignoring the numerous sentence fragments, that should be a semi colon.

Is she actually a professional writer?

You are literally Hitler. Well, in his youth.

This thread reminds me:

Really who's crying over 100k jobs in a country of 80 million?

"Artists" are leftist because none of them have ever had to do a day of hard labor in their lives.

"You might get pregnant? Good."

The planets are aligning for me. I want five.

Artists are genetic dead ends. It should be no surprise that they exist only to destroy civilization.

I knew one who was BTFOed in court. Being given a lawfag I pulled the case. 180 degrees from what she told me. I think she has learned from it.

You have your Huxley before you Orwell.

Most of them are rich and thus do not face the consequences of their globalist actions. They also have a large disdain for the lower classes.

Also reminder that Rowling's "I WAS ON BENEFITS" story is bullshit and she was only on it (while living comfortably with family) because she was too lazy to get a job because "MUH BOOK".

That's good to hear, user.

I can relate to these posts. There probably aren't as many right-wing artists or musicians in the mainstream because it's so difficult to be one.

Think of Reddit. You could be on there and have right-wing views, but you will quickly learn to keep quiet and choose your words carefully in order to have any success, and that's if you can put up with the endless faggotry enough to even stay.

Daily reminder that Rowling stole Harry Potter from Neil Gaiman's Books of Magic but only got away with it because Gaiman is a cuck feminist and did not want to sue a woman.

Remember who Gaiman is married to.

Artists might be prone to being liberal, but that doesn't mean the same thing in all times and places. The nature of Western artists today is mostly because of what the culture has turned into. It's not just artists pushing things like anti-whiteness. But artists can be very wealthy, famous and insulated, and treated like royalty, which can give them delusions of grandeur. While having no experience with politics, economics, law, policy-making, lower classes, blue collar work or military service. It's also a thing with these liberals that they gotta soapbox all the time and convert people to their religion, and there's no mechanism to curb that (in Japan they'd get fired, because talent agencies, movie studios, TV networks and sponsors don't want any controversy fucking things up).

The Art Renewal Center has written about this. They state that there's been a very aggressive, concerted and successful effort by academia to demonize, dismiss and memory hole traditional (AKA real) art and artists and their techniques, and replace them with postmodernism. The animator Richard Williams has also lamented that art students can no longer draw (see picture).

artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/PullingBacktheCurtain/pullingbackthecurtain.php
artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/Why_Realism/why_realism.php

STEMfag here, it seems like there are a lot of us

Good, good. More recruits for the ranks of Der Trumpenfuhrer's meme army.

To better understand art and why beauty matters. Watch this documentary by Roger Scruton. It will explain what art is about and why beauty is an objective need for humans. And naturally explain why art has been degenerated.

...

Reminder J. K. Rowling didn't even write the books.

Another member of the STEM master race here, that's been my experience too. I've even said, "Equality is a false god" and only gotten agreement.

Who did?

That's true and probably part of the reason why he is full cuck with the feminism bullshit.

in other news, a local man claims that his "sides" have "left earth".

I'm pathologically addicted to creativity, and I suspect most artists are too without realizing it. They call it "self-expression" to make it look good and lionize what amounts to a crippling mental resource-hog. Not being able to be creative is utterly stifling. The kind that makes you want to scream, and there's no mouth but to make something. In spite of knowing I would be more satisfied with my life accomplishments were I to invent a practical tool, I cannot imagine living with myself in an environment where I can't just spontaneously create something because I feel like it. The idea is nails on a chalkboard to me.

t. Wannabe STEMfag who couldn't and is now a resentful artfag because it's all I'm decent at.

Gaiman's wife, Amanda Palmer, used to go to parties all over Boston and just wander around naked. She broke up her band, the Dresden Dolls because the ONLY other person in the band started getting attention. Not more attention, just attention. She banged half the Boston music scene at the time and I'm pretty sure she has herpes.

jesus christ

The fate of the numale. Gaiman has my pity.

Becuase Jews are mostly liberal and they're the ones who pay for this gay shit

I would not call myself an artist but I do art as my job and I went to art school and all that shit.

the thing is that artists who are not pretentious hipsters and actually have some skill get a job and they just do that, libtard hipster artist on the other hand need to make their art about muh feelings and muh political struggle ;_; because they don't have skills, they just cum on a canvas and say that it represents gays being mistreated or some dumb shit, and that's the kind of shit that gets on the news, not the guy that has been working for years doing concept art for movies.

tl:dr, right wing artist don't bother anyone so you dont even notice they are there

Maybe if you grew some balls and drew art where Jews are the bag guys then maybe you'd get some more attention.

Art is mostly about novelty. I know many artists would take exception to that and talk about transcendence or whatever else but I believe the truth is, behind all the vanity, that its mostly about novelty. Who is able to deliver novelty most effectively, those drawn to tradition, or those drawn to progress?

I mean it. They steal money and put it in their bags

There's a serious element of this, yeah. Speaking personally, from experience. Art is for many the pursuit of novelty without the temperance of standards, morality, dignity, or quality.

It's entropy.

I don't want attention for a dumb political cartoon.
I just want to draw and get paid, most people don't feel the need to inject politics into their shit, they just want to draw cool robots, hot chicks and shit like that.
Also I have no problem drawing "offensive" stuff, some of the drawings I've made are illegal in some countries Australia

At this point, I think the United States might be the only country left where no kind of art is illegal.

Loli: Straya, Soviet Canuckistan
Muh Anti-Semitism: Soviet Canuckistan, Yurop, Russia
Muh Islamophobia: Soviet Canuckistan, Yurop, Middle East
Anti-Communism:China
Anti-Korean: Osaka prefecture, Japan
Nationalist:Germoney

Many people now believe novelty is crucial to art. Works are praised for no other reason, and criticized when they're not novel enough (anything resembling another work is a "rip off" and "stealing"). Even regular people believe this, not just "artists" and academics.

Imagine if, say, architecture worked the same way and nobody ever built on past work. They'd be building fucking inverted pyramids or making houses out of broken bottles because it's never been done before. Such bold innovation. But that's exactly how they approach art, and of course all they produce is trash. Sometimes literally.

Modern art was created to destroy tradition by the elite. Take the 1913 Armory exhibition in New York, which introduced modernist European art to America. This introduced Fauvism, Cubism, and Futurism to American artists and was hugely influential in moving American artists and the public away from realist art.

Who was the main guy behind the Armory show? John Quinn. John Quinn worked for British intelligence before, during, and after World War One. Who helped him make the show a sucess by buying most the exhibits? Arthur Eddy.

Who was Arthur Eddy? Well he is usually described as an "attorney" but he was actually an incredibly wealthy industrialist. A cousin of his wife founded General Motors. For example, he was a director of the National Carbon Company, which controlled 75% of the US carbon market, and was the precoursor of Eveready, which makes batteries. He was also involved with American Steel Foundries, which was the largest supplier of steel casings in the US and the chief supplier to the armed forces.

And by the way, where did this big exhibition of European avant garde art take place? Why in the Armory of the National Guard, in a building built to house the 69th infantry regiment.

The exhibition was a great sucess, selling $44,000 worth of art. The only problem was that it was John Quinn (British Intelligence) and Arthur Eddy (wealthy Industrialist) who bought most of the works.

So isn't this strange? A British intelligence office, John Quinn organised the first highly influential modern art exhibition in the US.
An incredibly wealthy industrialist named Arthur Eddy helped him out by buying most of the art.
This Arthur Eddy was involved with the company that sold most of the steel used by the US army, and coincidentlly the show was housed in a US army building. Very strange.

So what have we got?

Modern art. British intelligence. American industrialists. The US army. Strange. Very strange indeed.

Art attracts people with an emotional mindset. Think about art like this: I make things that make me feel good, and I sell that to people to make them feel good. It's what liberals like and what makes them feel good: making people smile.

It's really that simple.

Artist here, art isnt the problem, contrary to what has been posted, cynics can produce art, and art isnt about being emotional.

The problem is that a culture has been crafted around art that removes people who do not accept said culture, either planned or coincidence, when the jew took hold of art we were given a political standard to uphold, if you wanted to be an artist you had to follow the rules or no one would take you, youd be required to get out on your own, which has an insanely high failure rate.

see
It doesn't matter that Carol was worse, all Michael does is get money from the Peles castles in Romania and from his other properties, he recently named a prince different from his own son and his wife doesn't speak Romanian (saw her in a Romanian interview where she spoke French).
tl;dr Michael is a faggot.

Do we?

They're not. Most popular artists are because they're the ones that media promotes.

(in response to )

All these based well thought out posts.

Because most artists and i'm talking about the regular ones that infests these so called art-schools and whatnot aren't creative or skillful people.

They aren't geniuses or artists.

But they feel entitled to an identity that they are artists because they go to a meaningless lazy school that's focusing on "art", which basically is, perform shitty musicals, play cover-songs of pop-bands and "paint" in the style of some shitty modern-hack-style, that is neither beautiful nor requires any skill to do.

Why are so many people who's pushed by the ((media)) leftists? Because these people, these "brands" have millions of dollars invested in them from the kikes in the media-industry. All from publishers, to magazines, to agents, production-studios etc. So these people basically is owned by their handlers, their managers, agents and whatnot, because most of these people don't have the business-sense, especially not in the beginning and lacks the connections to make it, until they hook up with the right people. That way you have to adapt and play within ((their)) rules. But like in all walks of life, there as some real cunts that truly believe their own hype aswell, like Madonna or George Clooney.

Worrying how many people in this thread are willing to dismiss the arts as a whole because of the direction art has taken in just barely the last century. What of all the great artistic achievements to come out of western civilization? What about dedication to excellence and craftsmanship?

And to think Rowling has become a billionaire. Sickening.

She looks more obviously chosen every year.

"Artists" are overwhelmingly liberals because it's been a full century since kikes gained control of the art world and purged everything European and non-degenerate about it. Nobody else tries to become a professional artist because everybody with influence in "art" will do nothing but heap scorn upon real art.

As we all know, this was even one of Hitler's early redpills.

At my university the art department shares a building with the business department for some reason. Anyways they had a little exhibit set up. One had a bunch of ultra-degenerate paintings and was called "the seven deadly sins." The one that made me rage was a backdrop of 30+ orthodox icons that all had been sharpied with mustaches and devil horns and other rdiciulous, childish nonsense; foreground was a painting of a nude woman masturbating, and glued to the painting was a "used" condom with what I percieved to be glue in the tip among other disgusting things

JK Rowling wrote another kid's book that never got published - youtube.com/watch?v=3jV2MkS2QlU

Related

why

Harry Potter is anti-white.
Voldemort is supposed to be like Hitler, Rowling said so herself. Firstly, Voldemort is half-muggle which is like the theory that Hitler was part Jewish i.e. both are portrayed by the media to be hypocrites being the things that they are trying to eradicate. Secondly, the Muggle-born Registration Act is blatantly supposed to be the Ahnenpaß and other similar acts and laws from NSDAP Germany. Thirdly, in the films in the Ministry of Magic after Voldemort gains power there are wizard/soldiers who resemble the NSDAP soldiers. None of these things are similar to Stalin or the Soviet Union.
Dumbledore is portrayed as the best wizard and ultimate role-model for children and he's supposed to be a homosexual. Despite this, there is no evidence in the films or books that Dumbledore is actually homosexual. I believe that, like many, many other things in the Harry Potter series, Rowling just made it up as an afterthought and to tick more P.C. boxes.
Being pro-mud blood mixing = race mixing, being against it = ebil nazi

And who is Potter's nemesis (besides Voldemort)?

A guy with blond hair, blue eyes, being depicted as a coward and a bully who gets routinely humiliated and knock out by a stronk wymyn.

The issue with most artists is that they are very busy with art. They spend hours on a piece daily. So instead of interacting with people outside of their clique, they read/watch the (((press))) and treat articles as objective truth. Combine that with them heavily interacting with entertainment and you'll discover that they're idealistic people who unable to think from a pragmatic perspective.

It doesn't help that some governments fund them as well.

There are right-wing artists in the industry, but a lot of them are closeted. You'll see them working on commercial art and improving fundamentals instead. Although they aren't the "14/88 gas the kikes" types, they do greatly dislike politically correct people. I'm in a discord chat with freelancers and they're right-wingers who are Trump voters and Pro-Brexiters.

The only reason why they don't openly denounce it is because the industry is reliant on connections and that it's easy for leftists to dig up dirt on them. It's best to remain quiet if you want to get job offers.

Is that really art, tho? They didn't have cameras in those times, only marbles, mosaics or frescos.

exempli gratia, is vidya gaems art?

sandowbirk.com/paintings/the-great-war-of-the-californias/#

a bunch of jews.

Contrast this also with the Ecstacy of St. Teresa. There are obviously some sensual undertones but alot more extravagance.

Answer: liberalism promotes free thought through the use of imagination and substances. Most artists are highly creative, and liberalism allows for this. Whereas in a ridig right-wing mindset, youre naturally limited in perspective. There are pros and cons for both liberal and non-liberal attitudes, and the person may benefit from both at different times.

There's long been a push from the top to spread degeneracy. They often have too much time on their hands and seek out the mentally disturbed and deviant elements of society "for kicks". Moneyed patrons will often end up housing and supporting these untalented fringe artists they find for their entire adult lives.

Beyond this there's also cultural warfare where government agencies promote certain types of artists in an effort to control popular opinion and destabilize traditional morals.

A certain political element likes to make great feasts of the degeneracy of the west..
when socalled socialist realism wasnt even born in the USSR, but on the bloody soils of the England, Italy and Spain.

But then, what was real about it, anyway?

mmm.. such decadence

...

Or anything Canova or any of the other Neoclassicists did, that was as recent as 200 years ago.

What would disqualify it as art? The term has been skewed, that doesn't erase the historical definition.

God no, it's just entertainment.

I always wondered why this guy was never sued. Now I know.

FFS SHAVE

even with shaved pits she's a solid 5/10. it always boggles my mind when rich men shack up with such low quality women

J K Rowling and Harry Potter.
How exactly did this dreadful satantic anti-familiy ( Harry has no family, being adopted by “muggle” relatives who don't like him and whom he finds both ridiculous and contemptible. He is glad to leave them and go off to a boarding school where he never sees them) garbage get published?

Nigel Newton is the founder of Bloomsbury
Publishing, the publisher of J. K. Rowling
His mother is Anne St. Aubyn, whose family are closely related to royalty, including King Henry VIII.

Bloomsbury Publishing's chairman is Anthony Salz. Salz was the Chairman of the BBC in 2006, having been for several years on the Board of Governors. He is also a trustee of the trust which owns The Guardian newspaper, one of the largest in London.(The Guardian led the cheerleading for the first book in 1998.) He is also Executive Director of N. M. Rothschild and Sons Limited. This bank was founded in 1811 and serves the Queen, among other extremely prominent clients. Curious to find Bloomsbury Publishing connected in this way, isn't it? Rothschild and Salz are of course Jewish.

The aristocracy. The Queen. The Rothschilds. The BBC. The Guardian. Marxists. Jews.

Curious and curiouser.

.

you can only become an approved artist if you are in the correct "in group"

Not an argument. (But good and accurate post.)

The Rifftrax (MST3K) guys really go to town on the whole series, making repeated references to the fact that they worship Satan, will roast in Hell when they die, and “You see, Harry, when a group of people is different, it’s helpful to come up with a funny-sounding name, or slur, to describe them!” And never mind the whaling they give Hermione about the fact that she’s a mudblood.

I think they’re fairly redpilled.

Maybe he has enough fuck you money to not care?

They get where they are by being trendy, not by being right. Being right doesn't get anyone anywhere in this Jew-censored world.

Want more Lovecrafts, Kiplings, Tolkiens? Get rid of the Jew censorship.

…where have you been for the last decade?

You don't understand that the most important 20c authors, Lovecraft and Tolkien, were both reactionaries, because the leftist megaphone has been blaring at you for your entire life.

But lately it's been sounding like a vuvuzela. Nothing leftists say is remotely original now.

That's some really bad peotry, man. Maybe that's why you want to pick up a gun.

You should find a better medium to carry your fury and misery than the written word: it really does not suit your "style".

Luckily enough, you can use mathematics to create art too,

Thought that Raincoast didn't want to engage the Streisand Effect actually.

Professional artists are predictable; the world is full of dangerous amateurs.

Well JK Rowling started a 7 part book series only to bring things to a head at book 5 followed by 2 "I don't know what to do next" books which literally conclude the entire saga with "love conquers all."

So if the bitch is too dumb to plan ahead 3 books in a 7 book series well then I don't really expect that she has the capacity to say ANYTHING smart, despite whatever her bank account may contain.

In my case it was alcohol.

Fuck yeah I do.

The King of Horror himself on niggers:

"…monstrous and nubulous adumbrations of the pithecanthropoids and moebal; vaguely molded from some stinking viscous slime of earth's corruption, and slithering and oozing in and on the filthy streets or in and out of windows and doorways in a fashion suggestive of nothing but infesting worms or deep-sea unnamabilites."

I suspect it may have something to do with that the plebiscite is starting to become borderline illiterate on account of instantanous high frequency transmissions of tid-bits of information. Kind of like this place. From this perspective, her work is laudable, as at least more people may read books.

thats pretty gay. Show, don't tell. e.g. "Orpheus sung such a song that Persephone's heart of ice melted and she let Eurydice leave."

but yeah, I get that you're trying to remember Tolkien's most famous lines from Lord of the Rings

but with a martial challenge instead of fatalism. Brandish is a good word for using a trumpet.

Are you sure he wasn't referring to politicians?

Modern "art" is owned by kikes who promote shit like this pic as the height of artistry.

Most of the actual top tier art talent these days is in the concept art and illustration industry for games and movies. Pretty much every single artist in the top skill bracket works or has worked as an illustrator or concept artist. You rarely hear about them because they work behind the scenes and most of their work is under NDA for many years.

When you look at that scene, the art becomes strikingly less liberal than say, what you see in deviantart. It's not necessarily right wing, but you see values that appeal to right wing people, and queer cuckoldry becomes much more rare. "Powerful"/mystical female characters are very trendy right now though, so you do see those.

(((politicians))), perhaps.

Reminder.

You're a Holla Forumsitician.

It's a college thing. Prior to the Marxist-educated Baby Boomer generation, the actors, artists, and writers tended to run the gamut across the entire political spectrum–although, I believe a significant portion were right wing in particular. The only outlier was Trumbo and his crypto-commie ilk controlling Hollywood behind the scenes.

...

books 6 and 7 really were "oh god i'm out of fucking ideas" mode, especially when she pulled the horcruxes idea out of her ass and basically wrote herself into a corner. best part was how in the 7th book she decided to just kill off a bunch of meaningless side characters and have the owl get incinerated to try and raise the stakes because she didn't have the stones to kill a main character

Artists make their money by selling their art to the most people possible. Hence they follow whatever is the mainstream curent.

Is that third one Giacometti? Giacometti did some alright stuff outside of the sculptures.

Jews only fund/prop-up willing propaganda mouthpieces. There's plenty of red-pilled "artists" out there, they just don't get to see the light of day because they don't like the idea of being political drones.

Shiggydiggydooo

Look at Rotherham and tell me Orwell was wrong. Look at Obama's pre-2012 gay marriage position and tell me Orwell was wrong.

Huxley, of course, described what the end stage of Jew-controlled Europe would look like without explicitly naming the Jew, and also without mentioning explicitly the terror and lies that were papered over by blissful ignorant sex.

What idiot bumplocked this? This is a relevant discussion of culture. Fuck you.

Yes, most of you do.

These "Experts" she's talking about…

Are they the same ones the rich people are trying to use to convince everyone to abandon their economic sovereignty to a corperate state?

obviously she was involved in writing the books, maybe even more than the horse that could multiply was involved in multiplying.

They're not good books, it is not implausible that a random woman and some editors would have been able to write them.

It's not like these are not interrlated too.

Subject for another thread

Apparently there are some things you shouldn't talk about, Anyway, this place is a cesspool.

because most artists are hacks

No, it's the subject of THIS thread.

THIS thread is swiftly dropping off the catalog courtesy of the mods, and the subject of the thread is larger than just Brexit.

Fair enough.

I wonder what this guy's opinion of the Romantic Manifesto is.

...

majorly.

And that is why HP is just some dead 90's fad.

wow i dunno, its a mystery

They're artists because they are too stupid to do anything else. They are liberal for the same reason.