I seek to reveal the complex relationship between the bourgeois business world of art and the proletariat artist. Furthermore, I will be commenting on the appropriation and erasure of minorities by those who fetishize art merely for the sake of inflating their own visage of wealthiness. I will do this through a detailed reading of Karl Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party alongside the discussion of Walt Whitman tied with an analysis of the works of queer artists, such as Andy Warhol and Robert Mapplethorpe.
Table of Contents
1. Class Appropriation, or How the Bourgeoisie Commodifies the Art and Culture of the Proletariat, A Discussion Between Walt Whitman, Karl Marx, and Queer Art
Objectives and Topics
This paper aims to investigate the complex relationship between the bourgeois business world and the proletariat artist, specifically examining how the bourgeoisie commodifies and erases minority and proletarian culture for profit. By synthesizing the theories of Karl Marx with the poetic perspective of Walt Whitman and the lived realities of queer artists, the work critiques the process by which artistic expression is transformed into capital and alienated from its original social meaning.
- The role of the bourgeoisie in the commodification of art
- Marxist theories of alienation applied to the proletariat artist
- Walt Whitman's exploration of common observation and industrial modernity
- The commercialization and appropriation of queer culture
- The tension between art as a form of expression and art as a financial asset
Excerpt from the Book
Class Appropriation, or How the Bourgeoisie Commodifies the Art and Culture of the Proletariat, A Discussion Between Walt Whitman, Karl Marx, and Queer Art:
The role of art has often been shaped by those who have created it, outlets of expression, escapes from reality, or intense talent. However, the role of the patron has since influenced the creation of art. When art collectors are willing to spend millions upon millions of dollars for a piece of art originally created merely to mock the exact process that they are buying into, where does art end and business begin? Art collectors, or those who possess enough wealth to fetishize the work upon which artists have slaved over, disregard and erase the proletarian culture that art is often born from. The Bohemian artist is merely a tool of the bourgeoisie, producing work that will bring the art collector much more wealth than the artist can ever imagine. Through a detailed reading of Karl Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party alongside the discussion of Walt Whitman tied with an analysis of the works of queer artists, such as Andy Warhol and Robert Mapplethorpe, I seek to reveal the complex relationship between the bourgeois business world of art and the proletariat artist, further commenting on the appropriation and erasure of minorities by those who fetishize art merely for the sake of inflating their own visage of wealthiness.
Chiefly, what is the relationship between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat? Marx famously lays out the intricate manipulation that the proletariat suffers at the hands of those with great wealth. Wages should reflect product, that is to say that concept of a profit margin held by a business owner fails to compensate the worker fairly. The bourgeoisie has a totalitarian control on capital, any object created by a worker is merely in the possession of the business owner. This commodification of person by the bourgeoisie alienates the proletariat, draining the life out of the meager worker and enslaving production.
Summary of Chapters
Class Appropriation, or How the Bourgeoisie Commodifies the Art and Culture of the Proletariat, A Discussion Between Walt Whitman, Karl Marx, and Queer Art: This chapter establishes the theoretical framework by combining Marxist economic critique with the cultural observations of Walt Whitman to demonstrate how art is exploited as capital.
Keywords
Bourgeoisie, Proletariat, Alienation, Commodification, Art, Karl Marx, Walt Whitman, Queer Culture, Capitalism, Appropriation, Labor, Andy Warhol, Expression, Patronage, Materialism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The research focuses on the intersection of economics and aesthetics, specifically how the bourgeoisie commodifies the art and culture of the proletariat for financial gain.
What are the central themes of the work?
The central themes include class exploitation, the alienation of the artist in a capitalist system, the appropriation of minority culture, and the transformation of authentic expression into consumer capital.
What is the primary objective of the study?
The objective is to reveal the complex, often exploitative relationship between wealthy art collectors and proletarian or minority artists, showing how art is stripped of its meaning to serve the interests of the elite.
Which theoretical framework does the author apply?
The author primarily utilizes Karl Marx’s "Manifesto of the Communist Party" to analyze the structure of class-based manipulation and alienation within the art industry.
What topics are covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body examines the alienation of the worker, the role of observation in Whitman’s poetry as a counter-narrative, and case studies of queer artists like Andy Warhol and Robert Mapplethorpe as examples of commodification.
Which keywords best describe the paper?
Key terms include Bourgeoisie, Proletariat, Alienation, Commodification, Queer Art, and Capitalism.
How does the author connect Walt Whitman to Karl Marx?
The author uses Marx to explain the economic alienation of the proletariat and then looks to Whitman to explore how art and "common observation" can be used to seek connection, only to show how the bourgeoisie then attempts to commodify even this collective human experience.
How does the author characterize Andy Warhol in this context?
The author uses Warhol as an example of an artist who turned into a "bourgeois" figure himself, employing others to mass-produce art as capital, thereby exemplifying the very cycle of commodification the author critiques.
What is the significance of the "Queer Art" discussion?
The author views queer culture as a prime example of a marginalized group whose rejection of societal norms creates a unique culture that corporations now exploit and "package" for mainstream consumption.
What conclusion does the author draw regarding art and capitalism?
The author concludes that capitalism is inherently hostile to genuine artistic expression, as it constantly seeks to turn human emotion and cultural identity into tradable assets for the benefit of the wealthy.
- Citation du texte
- Benjamin Grubner (Auteur), 2016, Class Appropriation, or How the Bourgeoisie Commodifies the Art and Culture of the Proletariat. A Discussion Between Walt Whitman, Karl Marx, and Queer Art, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/344751
