how do you have a worker front and center in a landscape painting where the POV is a thousand feet in the air? of course everyone looks small from thousands of feet in the air, not all soviet art had someone in the middle of the frame either
the two art styles are not competing, they are good for different things, socialist realism is good for celebrating the worker, solar-punk is good for dreaming of a hopeful and more ecologically sustainable future in the same way old soviet sci-fi was, reimagined for a new time that is more ecologically conscious. just because a corporation co-opts an aesthetic does not mean it owns it, just that the aesthetic was powerful enough to co-opt
And my point is that dreams of a hopeful and more ecologically sustainable future should draw on actual existing socialism, and recognize the work that goes into building that future. As I’ve said, in a comment after comment in this thread, the issue isn’t with what solar-punk depicts, it’s with what it’s missing. The constructive thing to do would be to honestly acknowledge what’s missing, and work to expand the aesthetic to include that.
solar-punk isn’t missing labour in the same way soviet sci-fi art isn’t missing labour, a zoomed out POV focusing on a future landscape =/= invisible since the labourers are explicitly added into the art, and you don’t consider soviet sci-fi to be another version of the nordic model, right?
Again, if the range of solar-punk was to include visible labour that’s celebrated then I would agree. I must’ve explained this point a dozen times in this thread, and you just keep ignoring it. It’s as if you don’t actually honestly want to engage with what’s being said to you.
can you tell me what i haven’t honestly engaged with? you say that solar-punk doesn’t include the workers in high detail in its landscape art, and i’m saying that soviet sci-fi does the exact same thing, because it’s centered on future landscapes just like solar-punk
You haven’t honestly engaged with my point that the difference between socialist realism and solar-punk is that social realism both includes aspects similar to solar-punk such as the Soviet sci-fi pictures you keep posting here as well as celebration of workers. The range of art includes many different aspects of a socialist society painting a convincing picture that’s holistic. Meanwhile, solar-punk focuses on a narrow aspect of society leaving much to interpretation making it compatible with socialism or other social/economic models. Hence the title for the post.
that is socialist realism, but an artistic interpretation of a real rocket isn’t sci-fi
Meanwhile, solar-punk focuses on a narrow aspect of society leaving much to interpretation making it compatible with socialism or other social/economic models.
you said right here that solar-punk, an aesthetic that focuses on a sustainable future with a repairing climate is compatible with other social/economic models, or as you said in the title, the nordic model, which is capitalism
that is socialist realism, but an artistic interpretation of a real rocket isn’t sci-fi
Evidently you haven’t seen what a real rocket looks like.
you said right here that solar-punk, an aesthetic that focuses on a sustainable future with a repairing climate is compatible with other social/economic models, or as you said in the title, the nordic model, which is capitalism
What I said is that solar-punk is a superficial aesthetic that has no connection to how a socialist society actually functions. The depictions of farming you used as examples earlier are a perfect example of that. By your own admission, they paint a flawed depiction of the subject. The reason being is that this aesthetic isn’t created by people actually engaged in this type of labour, and who haven’t bothered to even observe it themselves. It’s fundamentally hollow, and as such it’s compatible with all sort of ideologies. Socialist art is political in nature, and its job is to provide a plausible vision for people to rally around.
I’ve already addressed this point the first time you posted this pic https://lemmygrad.ml/post/8502357/6685007
And my point is that dreams of a hopeful and more ecologically sustainable future should draw on actual existing socialism, and recognize the work that goes into building that future. As I’ve said, in a comment after comment in this thread, the issue isn’t with what solar-punk depicts, it’s with what it’s missing. The constructive thing to do would be to honestly acknowledge what’s missing, and work to expand the aesthetic to include that.
solar-punk isn’t missing labour in the same way soviet sci-fi art isn’t missing labour, a zoomed out POV focusing on a future landscape =/= invisible since the labourers are explicitly added into the art, and you don’t consider soviet sci-fi to be another version of the nordic model, right?
Again, if the range of solar-punk was to include visible labour that’s celebrated then I would agree. I must’ve explained this point a dozen times in this thread, and you just keep ignoring it. It’s as if you don’t actually honestly want to engage with what’s being said to you.
can you tell me what i haven’t honestly engaged with? you say that solar-punk doesn’t include the workers in high detail in its landscape art, and i’m saying that soviet sci-fi does the exact same thing, because it’s centered on future landscapes just like solar-punk
You haven’t honestly engaged with my point that the difference between socialist realism and solar-punk is that social realism both includes aspects similar to solar-punk such as the Soviet sci-fi pictures you keep posting here as well as celebration of workers. The range of art includes many different aspects of a socialist society painting a convincing picture that’s holistic. Meanwhile, solar-punk focuses on a narrow aspect of society leaving much to interpretation making it compatible with socialism or other social/economic models. Hence the title for the post.
soviet sci-fi is not under the umbrella of social realism, and how is an sustainable future with a repairing climate compatible with capitalism?
Really going to argue this isn’t socialist realism are you?
What does this have to do with anything I said?
that is socialist realism, but an artistic interpretation of a real rocket isn’t sci-fi
you said right here that solar-punk, an aesthetic that focuses on a sustainable future with a repairing climate is compatible with other social/economic models, or as you said in the title, the nordic model, which is capitalism
Evidently you haven’t seen what a real rocket looks like.
What I said is that solar-punk is a superficial aesthetic that has no connection to how a socialist society actually functions. The depictions of farming you used as examples earlier are a perfect example of that. By your own admission, they paint a flawed depiction of the subject. The reason being is that this aesthetic isn’t created by people actually engaged in this type of labour, and who haven’t bothered to even observe it themselves. It’s fundamentally hollow, and as such it’s compatible with all sort of ideologies. Socialist art is political in nature, and its job is to provide a plausible vision for people to rally around.