/32/ - Psychopolitics

I won't try to define it today, but one observation I believe needs to be made is that originality is not necessarily a characteristic of art. Just think of how many similar representations of Christ there are, all very similar to each other. The same goes for written art: in medieval Portuguese poetry there were categories that followed the same theme in similar form and with very similar plots/characters, e.g. "cantigas de amor" were poems written in the male persona in which he admires the target of his passion, "catigas de amigo" told the story of women who missed their suitors who went to war/disappeared.
I don't think anyone will deny that those are examples of art.
Tropes are necessary because there is a limited amount of possibilities for interesting and coherent narratives, both visual and written.

Also,
>Art is a cultural (and therefore both social and psychological) element of a society.
A social element of society? Who would have thought of that.

>>942
>similar representations of Christ there are, all very similar
Seems like I am not without blame.

Art is so pervasive that it decorates nearly every creation. Art is a work which is designed to be appealing. Even post-modern shite that's not aesthetically pleasing to most is designed to be appealing to hipsters.

Purely utilitarian creations are now few and far between. A functional plain wooden shack that displays little craftsmanship is not art when simply filling its role; However a picture or painting of the shack composed to appeal to rustic charms or make a statement is artful. Today many people discount the art in everything from their coffee mug's design to the coffee table's design. Some want to reserve the term Art for that which is exceedingly artful while taking for granted the art embellishing nearly everything around them -- usually to increase the worth or status in that which they personally find appealing.

>>942
>A social element of society? Who would have thought of that.

Facetiousness aside, apparently the CIA thought enough of that to weaponize modern art:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

Soviets also use art as part of the indoctrination propaganda.

Methinks you downplayed the psychological aspect mentioned:
>Art is a cultural (and therefore both social and psychological) element of a society.

Your snide post is worthless, rethink your waste of time. Perhaps consider what's said seriously before dismissing others out of hand.

>>964
>It was the beach-head from which culture could be defended against the attacks of Moscow and its "fellow travellers" in the West. (¶ 14)
Interesting that on this matter the Soviets were traditionalists and the Americans were the progressives, so it were the latter who were actually "attacking". This is applied linguistics: messages within messages which you don't notice in a conscious way.

>"...In order to encourage openness we had to be secret." (¶ 21)
All behavior control and monitoring must be done in secrecy if it is to be successful. People always change their behavior when they know they are being watched, and individuals will only jump through hoops if they believe that they are choosing to do so out of their own free will.

The idea that the agency would devote time and effort on a medium that not only interests a small parcel of the population and is capable of transmitting only the vaguest messages only reinforces the notion that the cultural products with more extensive range and clearer meaning were (and are) if not under direct control, heavily influenced by the deep state. Or perhaps I mistake the actual conclusion: the target is not the general population but the trend-setters and opinion formers, from whom the effects irradiate and grow almost organically.

This last observation made me think of targeted cultural products, i.e. different mediums with which to condition the masses and the intelligentsia.
Painting and sculpting are traditionally the realms of the wealthy and cultured, those who have the time to go to art museums, the money to buy decorative pieces and the self-importance to constantly seek to appear innovative and original. Targeting that demographic is a way to influence the executives, academics and politicians. Naturally, their influence will be felt by the masses, but perhaps not soon enough, or not strongly enough.
But a target as important as those is the common man, the one who works in a car factory, or in an office; the one who might be swayed by the syndicalists and by extension the socialists. You need media that doesn't require action from his part, you need media that goes to him! Radio, Television, Newspapers, those are all obvious targets and obvious platforms for ideological conditioning, but conditioning is never enough, is it? Besides, all of those kinds of media can obviously be used for targeted ideological propagation. The agency should also invest in something that can't be avoided, something that the city-dweller and proletarian sees every day, whether he likes it or not.
So, here is what I looked for, and here is what I found:
http://greatbuildings.com/types/usa/usa_1950-1959.html
http://greatbuildings.com/types/usa/usa_1960-1969.html
http://greatbuildings.com/types/usa/usa_1970-1979.html
http://greatbuildings.com/types/usa/usa_1980-1989.html
Quite the difference from the traditional "commie block", wouldn't you say? Perhaps nothing influences our view of the world more than the physical environment in which we inhabit.
Finally, I am reminded of a marginally related video I saw recently, that while isn't revealing in itself, may help people who don't understand just how widespread the planned use of symbols is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdtqtfXdR-c

What is the central message of my post?
Nothing is safe from ideological tempering.

>>966
Oh, I forgot to add:
As the source of the people's entertainment and distraction changes, so change the targets for ideological subversion. I have no doubt that the deep state is involved with the growing matter of politics in video-games. While they tried to do it covertly initially, the resistance they met could only be trespassed by an over political movement against the classic structures of gaming, even if its instigators remained in the shadows. Now that the apparent failure of their efforts becomes clear to them, will they retreat and reorganize or will they keep the pressure until the gamers crack (or are replaced by a more receptive audience)?

Now I can't help but wonder what other artistic expressions have been subverted... Tattoos come to mind, but nothing specific about them.

>>967
>Now I can't help but wonder what other artistic expressions have been subverted

Popular music probably, rap and gangster culture is the first thing I think of.
I tend to believe that the hypersexualization in the media and of pop music is also a means to some vaguely nefarious end.

>>969
You misunderstand. It is obvious music, films and literature have been subverted. I was wondering what cultural aspects that usually are seen as free from political meaning could be influenced.

As I posted before, architecture is not the first thing to come to mind when talking about political messages, yet it seems that it could have been influenced.

Other, less obvious mediums are fashion, jewelry, tattoos, product design, and likely even web design. Maybe a lot of sites have hidden messages like the image on the sticky but in a subtler and more effective way.

>>976
I just talked to this designer I know (who's PhD thesis includes some sociology about material culture), and she confirmed that design "definitely has ideological aspects to it. That was much more obvious and widespread a few decades ago, but some important designers from a previous generation still study that. Most current design students don't worry about that notion, being focused exclusively on working for big companies, but the Ideological factors are still very present. The choice of what to make, what necessity to solve, what production process to use, what audience to target, and how to present it are all ideological in one level or another."
I'm slightly paraphrasing. She then used as an example the recent surge in "sustainable design", in which a product is or appears to be more eco-friendly. A tactic that is often just part of the larger process of green-washing (making a brand, company or product seem ecologically sustainable when it in fact isn't). She outright confirmed my previous statement that everything is ideologically charged.

>What is hidden in the sticky image (sorry that you need to spoonfeed me)?
Now you listen to me anon, and you listen good. ==Don't you ever, EVER apologize for asking a question in order to learn something== A person who asks a question may seem ignorant for five minutes, but the person who doesn't ask will remain ignorant for the rest of their lives. If anyone ever gives you a hard time for asking a question, they probably have nothing of value to teach you anyway, and maybe they don't know the answer themselves. It takes courage to admit that you don't know something, especially in this google-connected society we live in. I hope that someday I can have the honor of asking you a question so that you can teach me something I don't know. You are my bro (even if you're a woman) and I would shake your hand if I could.

Anyway, click the image and tilt the screen back. If you still can't see it let me know and I'll tell you.

>>978
Whoa! Thanks anon!
This board is awesome.

You bring up great points regarding what your friend said. It brings to mind McLuhan's idea that the medium is the Message. In fact, come to think of it, this whole thread does...

>>979
Expand on that, please.