Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Dystopian Art

Rate this topic


DarkReaver13

Recommended Posts

In regard to Darkreaver's responses about his art. If you haven't made art in 3 years, the question that seems relevant to me is 'Why haven't you been inspired to make work since these last pieces?' Your curiosity about rules of Aesthetics seems to be based more on an urge in you now to make art that has relevance to your current state of mind. You seem to be wondering where to go from the last place you left off. Do you think that Objectivist rules of Aesthetics will expand or confine your personal art style?

In regard to We the Living

In making art there is a power to influence the audience. It seems that Ayn made the decision to kill Kira with the full intention of causing pain in the reaction of the reader. Why? What was her ultimate intention in causing such a situation to happen in her story? Any Rand had no lack of controversy in her works. She understood that the intensity and contrast of repulsion had motive power to it. Such a shock to the system has staying power, affecting people on deeper levels. Taking the emotions on a ride like that will attach stronger memory connections to the point of the story. Putting the reader in mortal fear of their own ability to loose everything they value. The reaction against such a situation is shown strongly in DragonMaci's position. That feeling may be exactly what she wants you to feel, because she sees a value in making you feel so intensely.

It depends on what you see as ultimate success. Is the happy ending of a Fictional story truly a success? It does not necessarily guarantee that the reader will be as determined to succeed in their own endeavors. If you know the hero will win from the beginning won't you question on some level if the hero was ever in any real danger at all?

Just because your characters are guaranteed a happy ending doesn't mean that you are. You could die in a car crash tomorrow, or a terrorist bombing. In a way happy endings can offer a false sense of security.

Ayn's own life was filled with real people who had succumbed to the death of their sense of life. She said that it was as close to an autobiography as she would ever come to writing. Kira's death can be seen as an homage to the tragedy of all of the people and potentials Ayn Rand saw perish first hand due to the circumstances of communism. It also symbolizes to me a reflection of what would have happened to Ayn if she hadn't escaped. Is Kira's death any less tragic than the death of Ayn's friends and family? Every day of Ayn's life seems to be a heroic claim to her sense of life, the very fact that she was able to publish her story from this side of the iron curtain is a testament to the success of the book. In a way she had to kill Kira, because she could never be that girl trapped in Russia again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that Ayn made the decision to kill Kira with the full intention of causing pain in the reaction of the reader.

And why the hell would I actually want to read a book that induces pain? There is no value in having a book induce an emotion of pain in me. I care only for the induction of happyness. I do not care to suffer. I care to feel pleasure.

Taking the emotions on a ride like that will attach stronger memory connections to the point of the story.

Well, I actually find a ride that ends with happiness will attach a stronger memory in me than pain will.

The reaction against such a situation is shown strongly in DragonMaci's position. That feeling may be exactly what she wants you to feel, because she sees a value in making you feel so intensely.

No, my feeling is that I do not read the book as it is of no value at all. That is clearly not what she wanted.

It depends on what you see as ultimate success. Is the happy ending of a Fictional story truly a success? It does not necessarily guarantee that the reader will be as determined to succeed in their own endeavors. If you know the hero will win from the beginning won't you question on some level if the hero was ever in any real danger at all?

I am not talking about the reader knowing that the hero will succeed. I am just saying if it does not happen by the end of a book I see no value in the book.

Just because your characters are guaranteed a happy ending doesn't mean that you are. You could die in a car crash tomorrow, or a terrorist bombing. In a way happy endings can offer a false sense of security.

Only if someone is stupid enough to be unable to seperate the fiction in the book and reality. I am not going to cater for the morons that cannot do so. I do not cater to morons.

Ayn's own life was filled with real people who had succumbed to the death of their sense of life. She said that it was as close to an autobiography as she would ever come to writing. Kira's death can be seen as an homage to the tragedy of all of the people and potentials Ayn Rand saw perish first hand due to the circumstances of communism. It also symbolizes to me a reflection of what would have happened to Ayn if she hadn't escaped. Is Kira's death any less tragic than the death of Ayn's friends and family? Every day of Ayn's life seems to be a heroic claim to her sense of life, the very fact that she was able to publish her story from this side of the iron curtain is a testament to the success of the book. In a way she had to kill Kira, because she could never be that girl trapped in Russia again.

I am sorry but that adds no value whatsoever to the book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reaction against such a situation is shown strongly in DragonMaci's position. That feeling may be exactly what she wants you to feel, because she sees a value in making you feel so intensely.

That is I beleive what is at least part of what she intended...and I can see why shoudl would intend that, as few certainly at the time saw that evil as it truly was, to the extent it really was so, and in fact few still really understand it. She sought to make it as fully, dramatically, painfully clear as possible so that none could honestly evade the full horror of it...and having a happy ending is not consistent with this.

To DragonMaci:

Say it is of no value all you like, but there is really no point saying it over and over, we get it.

Edited by Prometheus98876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is I beleive what is at least part of what she intended...and I can see why shoudl would intend that, as few certainly at the time saw that evil as it truly was, to the extent it really was so, and in fact few still really understand it. She sought to make it as fully, dramatically, painfully clear as possible so that none could honestly evade the full horror of it...and having a happy ending is not consistent with this.

Um, why would she want people to fee that they do not read the book as it is of no value at all? Because that is what I feel, not whatever the hell you and Tenderlysharp think I feel. I do not know what you two think I feel, but that is what I feel and that is clearly not what she wanted people to feel.

EDIT:

To DragonMaci:

Say it is of no value all you like, but there is really no point saying it over and over, we get it.

Wrong. I was correcting what Tenderlysharp thought I felt.

Edited by DragonMaci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, why would she want people to fee that they do not read the book as it is of no value at all? Because that is what I feel, not whatever the hell you and Tenderlysharp think I feel. I do not know what you two think I feel, but that is what I feel abd that is clearly not what she wanted peopel to feel.

I never said she expected people to read it if they see no value in it. I dont knwo why you think I did say it. I was clarifying the facts of the matter, you can interpret that as me trying to tell you to read the book again if you wish, but it was not that.

What is what she wanted people to feel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said she expected people to read it if they see no value in it.

I never said you said that. I said she did nmot want peoploe to not value it and decide not to read it. That is quite different to what you thought I said.

I dont knwo why you think I did say it.

Well, as I just said I don't. I don't know why you thought I did as nothing in my wording said or implied I did.

I was clarifying the facts of the matter, you can interpret that as me trying to tell you to read the book again if you wish, but it was not that.

I did not interprete it that way, nor did I say or imply uoi were trying to tell me that.

What is what she wanted people to feel?

I have no idea, nor do I care. What I care about is that the heroes die, thus ruining the story for me, and the fact the when I tried to read it the start was monotonous and boring. If the book had of been of interest to me I would care, but since it is not I do not care.

Edited by DragonMaci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No..you said it "it was clearly not what she wanted people to feel" WHAT wasnt. I

It is blatantly obvious what I was referring to:

No, my feeling is that I do not read the book as it is of no value at all. That is clearly not what she wanted.

And:

Um, why would she want people to feel that they do not read the book as it is of no value at all? Because that is what I feel, not whatever the hell you and Tenderlysharp think I feel.

Those bits in bold are clearly and obviously what I was talking about. You somehow missed that blatently obvious context. How the hell you missed something so obvious is beyond me.

EDIT: That "I do not read the book..." should read, "I do not want to read..." and that, "... that they do not read..." should read, "they do not want to read...".

Edited by DragonMaci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all have the chance to describe how happy/tragic endings influence us personally. You make it abundantly clear how you only like happy endings DragonMaci. My response is to my perception of Aesthetics, and not to antagonize you or convince you of anything you don't want to be convinced of. I appreciate that we disagree, it is a wonderful world to have differing views.

The reaction against such a situation is shown strongly in DragonMaci's position. That feeling may be exactly what she wants you to feel, because she sees a value in making you feel so intensely.

I should have written this part better, I did not mean to imply that Ayn Rand wants to make DragonMaci feel one way or another. I was trying to sum up the perception of the common/natural human desire for happy endings, and Ayn Rand's decision to go against the grain in order to make a point that some people value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have written this part better, I did not mean to imply that Ayn Rand wants to make DragonMaci feel one way or another. I was trying to sum up the perception of the common/natural human desire for happy endings, and Ayn Rand's decision to go against the grain in order to make a point that some people value.

That is as may be, but she did not want people to feel as I do, i.e., that the book is of no value. No author ever wants that.

Edited by DragonMaci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, that is what I thought you were getting at. No, I know for a fact that she would consider it improper of you to read a book you considered to be of no value. Though of course she would consider your estimation of the book wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Ayn Rand understood that some people would not like her choice to end her book with her hero's death. It was a classic individualist choice to end it the way she wanted to end it, regardless of the opinions of others.

There are probably stories she has read and loved that had happy endings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you just made the exact same mistake again. The mistake about what I was saying she did not want people to feel.

Opps sorry, I wasnt paying much attention to you it seems. Yes...she woudnt want peopel to think her book had no value, and she would defintely dispute such an estimation.

I believe that Ayn Rand understood that some people would not like her choice to end her book with her hero's death. It was a classic individualist choice to end it the way she wanted to end it, regardless of the opinions of others.

There are probably stories she has read and loved that had happy endings.

Definetely, and Im sure she would have been aware that many would disapprove of that ending. But I dont see her caring what they thought as she fully beleived herself that was the better way to end it (clearly I agree).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Ayn Rand understood that some people would not like her choice to end her book with her hero's death. It was a classic individualist choice to end it the way she wanted to end it, regardless of the opinions of others.

I am sure you are right, but that is beside my point.

Opps sorry, I wasnt paying much attention to you it seems. Yes...she woudnt want peopel to think her book had no value, and she would defintely dispute such an estimation.

Now you have got it! And of course she would despute it as clearly she valued it or she would not of wrote it and submitted it to the publisher. The heroes succeding like the The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged is of more interest and value to me, though, but that is a matter of personal taste.

Definetely, and Im sure she would have been aware that many would disapprove of that ending. But I dont see her caring what they thought as she fully beleived herself that was the better way to end it (clearly I agree).

Yes. While I disagree with the ending I do agree that she clearly thought it was a better way to end it. And clearly she did not care if others agreed. She would of been silly to of cared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It only took me like 3 attempts to get it right!

Not exactly any where near your best effort really. You are usually a lot better. :P

I do think happier endings like FH and AS are prefferable in general however, and those are better boosk partially because of their endings.

Finally we agree on endings. I did not think it possible. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well somewhat of an agreement sure. While I think endings like WTL can have value, I generally prefer the other sort.

Yeah, well I was saying we agree on the other sort, not WTL. We clearly disagree there.

I was thinking maybe a moderator should move this WTL stuff to a new thread. We should and could of, but it is a bit late now, so maybe a moderator should move it since it is off topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ayn did seem to adopt a less tragic and more heroic victory stance in her later work, though the pain of her history seems to have had a personal influence on everything she chose to do throughout her life.

To relate this back to painting, it seems that a priority in Objectivist Aesthetics is for the creator of the work to value it as high as their other values. As far as Capitalist aspects go, if the artist wants to make a profit the work should communicate a value to potential buyers that is at least equivalent to the time it took to make the work and the value the creator places on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I hope DarkReaver will return to this thread to comment more on how close this work is to his highest ideals, or if any of this discussion has given him a sense for where he can choose to go with future artwork.

Apologies, I forgot all about this thread.

In regard to Darkreaver's responses about his art. If you haven't made art in 3 years, the question that seems relevant to me is 'Why haven't you been inspired to make work since these last pieces?' Your curiosity about rules of Aesthetics seems to be based more on an urge in you now to make art that has relevance to your current state of mind. You seem to be wondering where to go from the last place you left off. Do you think that Objectivist rules of Aesthetics will expand or confine your personal art style?

I basically haven't found time to create any artwork for the past couple of years. I've been more focused on both consolidating my philosophy in terms of ethics and politics - which I now believe I have, and working on career related things (I'm a web-designer / digital media developer / computer programmer). I suppose my aesthetic tastes have been chanelled into my design work, and I have indeed seen large changes. For example look at my own website now ( http://www.darkreavers.co.uk ) compared to what it was just over a year ago ( http://www.darkreavers.co.uk/portfolio_item.php?id=3 ). There is also the intermediate stage between the two: ( http://www.darkreavers.co.uk/portfolio_item.php?id=123 ). The broken concrete style has been completely discarded.

Thinking about it now, if I were to create an artwork now, it would likely be much more "clean" in style, and would not be so indecipherable as the paintings which are linked in my original post. Still, I am still interested in depicting powerful emotions like anger and terror, but perhaps with more of a context and meaning to them. For example anger at irrationality and coercion, and the terror of those who attempt to escape reality when they realise that it is impossible.

Edited by DarkReaver13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...