B. is criticizing Communism’s
basic assumption that “every tree is judged equal tall, / in faith without
debate.” Obviously this is anathema for somebody pinning his hopes on fame, which
assumes the famous person has something unique and special to offer. “Henry is
dreaming of a society, / one where the gifted & hard-working / young poet
is cherished, kissed as a king / to come, a prized comer.” Writing poems
produces nothing the totalitarian state values—wheat and machinery, for example—so
the poet Brodsky was given five years hard labor in a “distant locality”, Siberia,
where his labor would atone for all those years of parasitism on the State. It’s
a shocking pronouncement to an artist, all right. But artists have always been
held dangerous by totalitarian states, and often are persecuted. Here in the US,
that is happening as well, though not to the extent the Soviet Union or the
Nazis took it. Several US states are seeing great universities damaged through
this kind of movement. Universities of course are liberal hotbeds of dangerous
thinking and uncomfortable knowledge, where elitists disrespectful of American
exceptionalism criticize, speak up, and generally get in the way of what is
right and good. We can’t send them to Siberia, but we can certainly starve the
beast that supports them. This is a step toward the outright Soviet/Fascist
style oppression that Orwell warned against, a bit more direct and aggressive
than the Huxley take on how to suppress artists, which is to let them talk, overwhelm
them with bullshit, marginalize them as trivial, and no one listens. No need
for unpleasantness.
The totalitarian accusation of
artists as parasites is poppycock, of course, though the word “poppycock”
probably doesn’t capture the violent undertones that accompany direct
suppression. It’s all hypocritical to a breathtaking degree, as insistence on a
kind of enforced equality is used as cover for the same old wealth/power elite
arranging things for their own benefit and destroying anyone who gets in their way.
Eventually Soviet Communism collapsed through corruption and abysmal public
morale, and the Nazis would have gone the same way eventually if the Soviets
and the US and Britain hadn’t destroyed them first. In the meantime, enormous
damage was done.
At least there is one thing to
remember: In destroying artists, the totalitarian state acknowledges the power
of art. Let the State be publicly criticized and politically resisted,
absolutely, but some of the most effective tools to undermine the bad guys is
to laugh at them on one hand and to beautifully show them for exactly what they
are on the other, so that a broader moral imperative takes root. Most people
are basically good, and will act through systems that maintain their integrity,
though they are vulnerable to lies and to the grasping of psychopaths.
Totalitarian states can fight back with violence and suppression, and they
often gain the upper hand through terror, but eventually, laughter and beauty
shine on their agents and they wither, anxiously cowering inside their 40th
story corner offices.
B. knows: A little political
ranting is good for the spleen now and then.
No comments:
Post a Comment