I'd say Ayn Rand is the person most responsible for both 'libertarianism' and the 'self-esteem movement' as we know them today, even if she is identified philosophically with the term 'objectivism' (her use of that term, that is). Also, for better or worse she helped popularize 'philosophy' as a topic of non-academics. As I said before, I find her more interesting as a novelist. However, I think her approach to a theory of art is different than what you might get in an academic course on the topic, and not gag-inducing. Don't you think her insights about 'romantic realism' would explain the popularity of 'Avatar' more than some of those efforts we see over on Marxmail?
For a taste, you might try (instead of a primary source): http://www.liberalia.com/htm/cm_rand_aesthetics3.htm However, it is this simplicity in her philosophy of aesthetics that gives it an immediate appeal; it is not erudite and specialised because it refers to our common experience. What is truly novel in Rand’s approach, however, is the emphasis she places on an artist’s sense of life. Art is universal in the sense that every human society produces some sort of artistic works. Yet a single work of art is not universally admired, because each one of us has a different sense of life; what I like is not what you like. But when you and I enjoy the same art, it transcends history, culture, religious beliefs, social environments, and the artist's explicit philosophy. This is what I have tried to illustrate with paintings and sculptures that we can all enjoy, and yet which were created by official artists of the two most despicable political regimes of all time. Rand herself ranks Victor Hugo as her favourite novelist, yet Victor Hugo was “irrational” by Randian atheistic and rationalist criteria; Hugo was a believer in God, a believer in the occult, he “channelled” messages from the dead, and, worst of all, he was a social democrat. Likewise Rand mentions Edmond Rostand’s Chantecler as her favourite play. This drama is not in a league with Euripides’s and Shakespeare’s, it is not even a great work of art, but still, as Rand does, I like it. I enjoy Rostand’s sense of life, and I am more moved by Cyrano de Bergerac, L’Aiglon or Chantecler, than by other greater masterpieces, but in which I do not find the values which are mine. Only snobs praise art that does not move them. As the etymology reveals, an author (auctor) is one who “makes something larger”, who magnifies, who ennobles.. Hugo and Rostand both dare to be great. They portray characters who are larger than life. They create heroes. Let’s look for the artists that bring out the hero that is inside each one of us. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
