Reaction Paper On Marx

Reaction Paper on
Karl Marx: Marxist Aesthetics &

Marxism and Critical Art History
Karl Marx must have stirred and had a bone rattling episode when the “Salvador
Mundi” was auctioned off by Christie’s in New York for $450.3M in November 2017.
Such “transaction” in the context of art was exactly what he was referring to when he
said that “art has lost its way due to capitalism.” Imagine an art piece sold at a price
greater than the GNP of at least 20 countries, not to mention that it is a painting of
Jesus Christ (“religion is the opiate of the mind”), and the painting has been in the
middle of a string of scandals.
Marxism – as a social, political and economic ideology – instills in strongest terms
the principle of collective ownership as a standard of equality, rapid increase in
production, and a rise of a large working class.
The sale of the “Salvador Mundi” is not in any way aligned with any of the
principles. For one, the private ownership of a piece of art valued at such
extraordinary amount is the exact opposite of collective ownership specially if it will
be kept out of public view. These art pieces, for Marx, is more appropriately
displayed in a state museum, or as a mural, for everyone’s enjoyment, inspiration
and appreciation.
In the Marxist view, I suppose as an effect of a social, political and economic
framework, art is therefore also an ideology. And as an ideology, it should
emphasize class as its primary character. And the class that Marxist/Socialist
ideology professes to uphold is the working class, the class that sweats and
produces the necessities that the society needs.
As the rise of the Marxist/Socialist movement is a result largely of the struggles
against the ruling class – capitalists, oligarchs, elite – the ART appreciated by the
working class and prescribed by the movement’s leadership cannot coincide with the
taste and standards of the existing social structure and the very class they were
revolting against.
The Marxist/Socialist dogma’s strength lies in labor and productivity. The BASE
of the ideology is therefore anchored on the factors of production – like capital,
goods, raw materials, commodities and tools. Art is part of the superstructure, that
part heavenly influenced by the economy and not directly related to production and
output. Yet, art as an ideology is recognized as something that maintains and
influences the base, a recognition that humanities have a role in shaping the entirety
of humankind. In this lies the commonality between ideologies. Be that Marxism,
Capitalism, or Communism, there is a realization that man should transcend the
material aspects of the economy as existence much have to do with the fine arts,
family, culture, religion, law, etc.
True art in Marxist terms should also be a revolution, transformative and
evocative. It should stir emotions and ideas. This is basically the same in the sense
of other thoughts – western, eastern or afro. But because of the diversity of
background and experiences, beauty takes differing forms and views.

The difficult experiences of the working class would have contributed much to
the formation of the lenses of the Marxist view point. Recall that they struggled.
Recall that there was a time when their social classes were banned from engaging in
art. Recall that sitting for a portrait is in the domain of rich alone – time and resource
consuming and yet does not produce anything for the benefit of the common good.
These social classes would naturally be alienated and would learn to abhor the
symbols of excessive wealth that unfortunately the art of old ultimately symbolized.
But it is human to appreciate art as it is also human not to exhibit that you are
enjoying the symbols of the injustices you are struggling against. The Marxist art
ideology thus came up with their lenses in evaluating beauty via the aesthetic
experience.
I cannot argue against what they say. Art should be realistic. Art should be for
the appreciation of the multitude. Art should drive conscious altering. From these
we see the value of art, not on its price tag, although real art genius should be justly
rewarded, as well.
There is also truth that in a corrupt world, man gets alienated from himself and
became less capable of being human, incapable that they fail in evaluating beauty
via the aesthetic experience. This is the part where capitalism erodes the value of
art, when beauty is measured by the price tag it brings in.
What then are the lessons from these thoughts? The bottom line is art evokes
thoughts and feelings, whatever ideology we subscribe to. Art can be a strong force,
it can inspire people to move, even to be radical. But, to be on the same level of
appreciation art should be based on what is realistic and the aesthetic experience.
Putting a price on art may distract us in finding what is really beautiful. Basing
beauty on the experience of the multitude is a standard that both socialists and
democrats can agree on.
Hoping that Karl can laugh at Groucho’s jokes.

Reaction Paper On Marx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reaction Paper On Marx

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reaction Paper On Marx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reaction Paper on

Karl Marx: Marxist Aesthetics &

middle of a string of scandals.

Marxism – as a social, political and economic ideology – instills in strongest terms

the principle of collective ownership as a standard of equality, rapid increase in

production, and a rise of a large working class.

extraordinary amount is the exact opposite of collective ownership specially if it will

displayed in a state museum, or as a mural, for everyone’s enjoyment, inspiration

In the Marxist view, I suppose as an effect of a social, political and economic

framework, art is therefore also an ideology. And as an ideology, it should

produces the necessities that the society needs.

As the rise of the Marxist/Socialist movement is a result largely of the struggles

of the ideology is therefore anchored on the factors of production – like capital,

output. Yet, art as an ideology is recognized as something that maintains and

of humankind. In this lies the commonality between ideologies. Be that Marxism,

Capitalism, or Communism, there is a realization that man should transcend the

family, culture, religion, law, etc.

True art in Marxist terms should also be a revolution, transformative and

of other thoughts – western, eastern or afro. But because of the diversity of

background and experiences, beauty takes differing forms and views.

art, when beauty is measured by the price tag it brings in.

democrats can agree on.

Hoping that Karl can laugh at Groucho’s jokes.

You might also like