In November 2002, I took the Green Line of Chicago’s El for the first time. I went exactly one stop: from the heart of the Loop to its western edge, just above the new headquarters of the Boeing Corporation. A few more blocks west lies [RETURN TO ARTICLE]
FOLLOW US
Also by Kathryn Rosenfeld
-
Tacitly Tactical
Heaven and Buddy are two conjoined rooftops and raw loft spaces along the stretch of Chicago’s Milwaukee...
MORE » -
This Is Not an Essay on Political Art
In November 2002, I took the Green Line of Chicago’s El for the first time. I went exactly...
MORE »
SUPPORT INDEPENDENT MEDIA
Invest in the news you need. In These Times is a nonprofit, reader-supported magazine and website.
subscribe today for $19.95!
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
MOST READ
- Why Conservatives Can’t Fix Poverty
- The Girl’s Guide to Staying Safe Online
- Siri and the High-Tech Gender Gap
- It’s the Stupid Republicans, Stupid
- True Crime Finance Stories
- Is the Federal Government Helping to Bust Unions?
- Anger Sowing Seeds of a New Consumer Movement
- What Can Labor Learn?
- Marching Off the Cliff
- New Eden, Old Devils

Reader Comments
thanks for the article Kathryn. while I agree with many of the points you’ve made I will say that there are still too many generalizations here with no real conclusins. for the sake of argument I will simply define art as an expression of human culture. to state the “subconscious assumption that art and capital are somehow synonymous” becomes a direct observation in a human culture where the flow of capital reigns supreme. to change the nature of art means to change the nature of the culture. art that engages that form of culture takes part in it. art that defies that form of culture departs from it. this may be the definitive process of change.
Ah art. I was an artist once. I believed, I mean BELIEVED in abstract expressionism as the only viable art form and all others were trash. Then the trends left me behind and I thought, if Truth is so changeable, so subject to fashion, what is Truth in art? Is it really a useful means of finding Truth? I gave it up. Today I don’t believe art points to anything except to fame and riches for a few of those involved. Everyone genuflects in front of the old masters. They didn’t paint to shock middle class sensibilities. They painted to inspire. When a new canvas by Raphael or Michelangelo went on display the whole country was thrilled and flocked to see it. People wept. People had visions. By comparison, who goes to see art today except for a few snots who define their cultural withitness in that manner. Art is valuable as history, as cultural markers, though. I do enjoy it for that reason. I love to go to the museums here in DC and watch history unfold from canvas to canvas. Warhol expresses his times better than anyone, but as marker of Truth, I give him a Z. The concept of art as the highest expression of our culture is a chimera. Meditate, friends. Practice yoga. That is where Truth is.
register a new account »Posting Security