Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020) (daily.jstor.org)

42 points by neom 3 hours ago

rbbydotdev a minute ago

Incredible to believe the CIA has more sway over artistic movements than actual artists.

dang 8 minutes ago

Related:

Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36155204 - June 2023 (332 comments)

Was Modern Art Really a CIA Psy-Op? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23525366 - June 2020 (7 comments)

keiferski 34 minutes ago

Pretty embarrassing that this is the title of a post on JSTOR.

Modern art started in the late 1800s, long before the CIA or its predecessor existed. Using this term to describe contemporary art, or abstract art more generally, is an (anti?) shibboleth that indicates you don’t really know what you’re talking about. I realize the article is about mid century artists, but I’m certain it’s being upvoted here because people think the title is referring to contemporary, 21st century art.

If you meant something more specific, like abstract expressionism, then again, it’s mostly just a continuation of previous trends. Sure, the government sponsored some things, but it’s not as if postwar American artists invented the entire concept of modern art (which is what the article seems to be implying.)

And if you meant very abstract / performance contemporary art, the kind of thing uninformed people like to describe as modern art, again, most of that got started in the 60s (with antecedents in the 10s, 20s, etc.) and was mostly by people the CIA thought were subversives.

mauvehaus 2 hours ago

Oh man, I just listened to an episode of Decoder Ring about why making classical realist sculptures in the US is a challenge. It gives some interesting context about the rejection of realism in the post-war West:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/we-are-monumentally-ba...

mikert89 2 hours ago

Far more things/movements are orchestrated than are organic. This is to me one of the most surprising things I have learned as I got older.

pkul an hour ago

I am starting to be under the impression that movements are steered by leaders but formed only when the underlying conditions are present. No single element can make the movement.

I am reluctant to believe stories like "The CIA created modern art", as it is just a single part, although a very influential part, of the movement.

I say this as somebody who is very cautious about believing anything and am quick to call things (probably incorrectly) propaganda or disseminated by paid actors.

colechristensen 2 hours ago

“educate, inspire, and strengthen the hearts and wills of free men.”

Funny how times have changed and more or less everyone on every side is fighting for the strength and survival of their own groupthink and little more.

sublinear 2 hours ago

Eventually, people realize they will never agree and therefore don't have to fight.

They realize the majority of their beliefs already existed before they were born and will continue on after they're dead. They have nothing to add to the conversation while they are too busy fighting. They turn their focus to developing their ideas peacefully and let their subcultures flourish once again.

This isn't the first cycle and won't be the last. The last major cycle was in the 20th century due to broadcast media. I think people sometimes forget how relatively young the internet is.

simpaticoder an hour ago

"Live and let live" is in fundamental tension with "protect the weak." ALL aggressive ideologies act as heroes protecting others from oppression. There is a barely expressible thing that allows people to live in peace with those they disagree with. It is a personality trait, an aesthetic, a mood associated with the best of the Enlightenment but never described by it. Perhaps people need relative silence, a few good books, physical labor, hand-made goods, and slow travel to attain it. I often wonder at how boldly people think they can reduce the enormous, holistic experience of being of a particular time and place and call the effect simply "reason".

WD-42 2 hours ago

I don’t know if this is a reaction to AI or something, but recently I’ve only been interested in classical/realism art. I just can’t do abstract cubes anymore. The default wallpaper of windows 11 is a perfect example - I hate it. Give me a wallpaper of some painting from the Renaissance.

rramon an hour ago

Kinda paradox because AI seems better at replicating complex classic paintings and realism than rather simple modern parametric imagery.

tacitusarc an hour ago

I feel like a picture of rolling hills with spring wheat and a blue sky wouldn’t go amiss

WD-42 an hour ago

They should bring it back

lattice_epochs an hour ago

Sounds like modern art was the kpop of its era.

analog31 an hour ago

Oddly enough kpop is the result of American music taking over the world.

ChrisArchitect an hour ago

(2020)

Some previous discussion:

2023 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36155204

Eufrat 2 hours ago

Sounds like it was more about spreading American culture as part of the Cold War. This feels a lot more benign compared to Modernist architecture which seems to have fascist tendencies what with Le Corbusier and Philip Johnson being literal Nazi sympathizers.

senectus1 an hour ago

lol i think the CIA is nowhere near competent enough to even consider that idea.

ButlerianJihad 2 hours ago

Just gonna leave this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_the_Art...

Juxtaposed with: https://youtu.be/8adu_rSMdXM?si=GZSeKWodp3ivFZyo

Your tax dollars, hard at work!

Barbing 2 hours ago

And here I was thinking any psyop was necessarily bad.

gigatree 2 hours ago

Are you saying modern art is positive?

math-man 2 hours ago

Do you not appreciate art?

NordStreamYacht 2 hours ago

bigstrat2003 2 hours ago

colechristensen 2 hours ago

The leadership of nations requires you to put pressure on the thoughts and minds of your people, left to their own devices those minds will simply be shaped by someone else.

The morality in it comes from your motivation and methods. Secretly giving piles of money to the weirdos you successfully identify as being the leaders of artistic movements to amplify those movements can't be all that bad.

The question of the day is if you were the CIA trying to do the same thing today, who and what would you fund?

left-struck an hour ago

I would fund things which make people less susceptible to manipulation and more equipped to think for themselves.

Because I believe in democracy not as a political tool but as a fundamental right. I don’t wish to use democracy to gain more power.

But maybe that’s why I’ll never be in that position, to make that choice.

derektank 42 minutes ago

I wouldn’t because the CIA is explicitly barred by Congress (Title 50 U.S.C. § 3093) from conducting influence operations intended to affect American public opinion since the Intelligence Authorization Act of 1991.

claytonjy 2 hours ago

Betteridge’s law prevails. A fun read, but not as fun as the title suggests.

tl;dr Modern art existed before the CIA and even CIA predecessors did not originate it, but they did push it abroad to show that America is great because we put up with modern art made by socialists depite most americans disliking both the art and the artists

zhivota an hour ago

The interesting thing to me is, despite it being hard to imagine today, back then this was actually a strange thing, and did actually serve as a demonstration of American freedom of expression.

Hard to imagine today because this kind of weird art comes from just about everywhere with a few exceptions now.

Interesting to read about how it actually was the work of a few elite institutions that made this happen. Agreed the CIA angle is a bit weak, to me it's more a story about the Rockefellers and their compatriots who funded this stuff.

altmanaltman 41 minutes ago

But I mean is this something that is supposed to be shocking or revelaing? All countries want to promote their culture so they win the soft war and influence. You think people just magically started liking kpop in the us? Look up what the south korean gov planned and how it worked out overall.

It is interesting they were taunting the Soviets by saying "look our artists are so free even we dont know wtf they are making but we support them!" rather than "look how amazing modern art is" lol

ks2048 30 minutes ago

Is calling everything a Psy-Op a Psy-Op?

NordStreamYacht 2 hours ago

More likely it was a money laundering operation disguised as a psyop.