by Anatoli V.
Lunacharsky
[Thesis of the report to the First Conference of Proletarian Cultural Organizations-Proletkult "in Russia.]
1. Art can be called universal to the extent that anything valuable in the work of centuries and peoples is an integral part of the treasure of world culture.
2. No one, however, it occurs to deny the obvious differences between art of different eras and peoples.
3. We Marxists, we know that these differences are not explained by vague concepts such as the national spirit, the time or weather, but by the social system, determined, in turn, by the correlation between classes.
4. Art is either pure expression of the ideology of a particular class or other experience on the cross influences of various kinds, but the class analysis of the artwork is the most fruitful for investigation.
5. The art of the same class is not always identical. There are classic examples of the evolution of art class: germs, aspirations period, classicism, realism, romanticism of despair, mysticism.
6. Despite this, all stages of the evolution of art in a given class are colored by the psychology of the class in question.
7. Attempt to characterize the future proletarian art based on these approaches.
8. The independence of the proletarian creation is expressed in its originality, nothing artificial, and assumes familiarity with all the fruits of the previous culture.
9. The intelligentsia is already playing a role in the birth of proletarian art via the creation of a series of temporary works. ----------------------------------------------
-------------------------------- Written: In 1918, for I Conference of Proletarian Cultural Organizations of All Russia, in Moscow, 15-20 September., 1918.
First Edition: Editorial Judozhesvennaya Literature, Moscow, 1967. Scanning
: Marxists Internet Archive, June 2000.
Source: AV Lunacharsky, on art and literature, Literature and Art Ed, La Habana - Cuba, 1985
0 comments:
Post a Comment