Artists who appear to be conservative/right-wing at heart, yet are mostly lauded by liberals/leftists.

More consistently what you see is that the "conservative" leanings of artists lauded by "the left" boils down to wanting to live in the woods and own guns and the rest of the world can fuck right off.

My sense is the conservative thing about some artists that bothers me is this urge to fit everything into neat little boxes, this control freak Kubrick style.

whereas out-of-control has dwarves, red-curtained rooms, hoodlums and hooligans, owls... you know the drill.

Yeah. this is incredibly irritating. Momus, did you put that essay on skulls & all things goth on your blog? I could swear I read it there & thought, huh, I completely agree.

Bresson = very Catholic.

So OTM

yeah i think i said something about transcendence through suffering.

What? What evidence are you using for either? I can see Bush and Hoover expanding government and Reagan certainly got more government money to spend than ever before but I still don't see how you came to either conclusion. Are you assuming FDR was just riding Hoover's policy on the New Deal?

Oh, and I to answer the thread directly I think any right-wing person in the arts who gets lauded. Has there ever been a "critically acclaimed" art or artist who was liked exlusively by "the right"? No. If that were the case they wouldn't be critically acclaimed, right?

But the Republicans do get credit for expaning the government / public sector.

ha. hahaha.

I have a gay friend that insists that Eliot was "one of the boys." He reads "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" as the narrative of repressed gay man. While I can definitely see such a reading being justified, I'm not sure if there is enough evidence to say he was. (The other evidence I've heard to support this are the allusions to homoerotic passages in Dante that Eliot uses). What do you all think of this.

It's true that Eliot had gay/bisexual left-leaning friends (ie. Virginia Woolf), so I guess some liberals like him. I like him.

yeah, it's for these reasons we have the useful 'things are beyond left and right' cliche.

i mean of course catholics are conservative, in their sexual politics and more often than not in their politics more broadly. their whole schtick is against rational secularism (ie the historical left, inheritor of the french revolution).

tuomas' point re the lutherans is interesting -- you would imagine that the lutherans would have no time at all for the state, would you not?

I don't think expanding the military is an inherently liberal/left principle! Liberal/left doesn't mean that you want big government in every sector regardless of what it does (otherwise fascists would be the ultimate leftists). Nor does it prove that Democrats are further right than Republicans just because the economy does better under them! If anything, it could seem to suggest that (slightly) liberal policies actually work economically.

john currin.

(perfect neo-con, a la adam curtis "power of nightmares" defn.)

I was referring the "mainstream liberal-left". Not the mainstream as a liberal place necessarily.

The "stock markets perform better under Democrats" thing is documented here (CNN) and here (New York Times).

Wow, that's really quite an amazing study. One thing I have with it is if it takes into account who has control of Congress at the time. Would Reagan get credit for the 1980s despite Democrats being in control of the houses, etc?

that's a bit of a red herring, considering Reagan's economic policies were enthusiastically backed (at least in the first term) by a cooperative majority of "Reagan Democrats" and Republicans (the raising of the nat'l debt ceiling, etc.)

so you could really put any conservative OR right-wing artist in here and it wd work

are often too busy doing that kind of stuff to make any money and tend to favour a status ladder in which cleverness about arty things counts for more and money counts for less

this usually counts as being left/liberal although whether it should is a different matter

Frank Miller used to be like this, but I'm pretty sure most of his leftist fans have abandoned him by now.

That reminds me - I'd like to reread those Martha Washington books again at some point. What was the deal with those?

Billy Corgan?

the answer to this is miranda lambert

Mort Walker!

FP'd you for Dik Browne erasure

Jorge Luis Borges is one that immediately comes to mind, though his politics mostly aren't evident in his writing. I can't imagine most conservatives have read him, let alone heard of him.

The above stuff about Lynch from 2006 is very interesting in the light of 2020, particularly the stuff equating "family values" with conservatism. Though cons always paid lip-service to such values, I can think of few things more corrosive to family values than capitalism.

shows how the perception right and left has changed so significantly the last 10 years ( also to the point where I'm wondering whether Bill Hicks isn't creeping closer to a valid answer here)

Bill Hicks would have been a Berniebro.

Norm Macdonald seems to be the most obvious answer to this thread right now

The above stuff about Lynch from 2006 is very interesting in the light of 2020, particularly the stuff equating "family values" with conservatism. Though cons always paid lip-service to such values, I can think of few things more corrosive to family values than capitalism.

Lynch is so into families that he's had four of them

(and started at least two of those by cheating on then ghosting a previous partner or wife aiui)

Damn, I didn't know that. X reference with the "separating the art from the artist" thread.

Bill Hicks would have been a Berniebro.

I'd suggest H.L. Mencken, even though his politics were all over the place by today's definitions. "At heart" he seems conservative.

and unless I’m misremembering p gd racist

you're not misremembering

Nah he’d be a corona truther.

I don't know how the guy who talked like this gets lumped into the reactionary bin -" Take all that money we spend on weapons and defenses each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace."