A sweary—and expertly punctuated—weblog.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

The best just keeps on getting better

Sigh. Many of you will remember Jon McNaughton, whose unfettered artistry I sampled in a recent post. Well, he's at it again:

The Forgotten Man!
(Incidentally, one of the cutest parts of McNaughton's site is his right-click blocker, which soberly informs you that the images on his site are copyrighted. I just want to pat him on the head and ruffle his hair!)

Perhaps he realized that playing artist-in-residence to the fringe right generates notoriety and its corresponding profits. I can hear Ayn Rand's post-mortem exultation from all the way over here.

I seriously considered not writing about this painting—there isn't much to say that doesn't also apply to McNaughton's previous offering—yet after the enthusiastic response to my previous post I feel duty-bound to share it. It's all here, just as before: the crushingly heavy-handed political message, the workmanlike copy-and-paste historical portraiture, the inarticulate rebuttal of "liberal" criticism. So as much fun as it would be to tear The Forgotten Man limb from limb, allow me instead to offer summary criticism. It's a better use of everyone's time.

Art transcends the prosaic machinations of day-to-day politics. It may reflect on its times, but when it does so it captures their essence rather than regurgitates their tiresome details. Decades from now we will have largely forgotten the political minutiae responsible for the controversies over which we so bitterly disagree, their particulars no more noteworthy than the 1791 whiskey tax or the merits of bimetallism. Yet McNaughton glorifies the petty conflicts, disgorging one-sided talking points as though they were timeless truths plucked from the tree of knowledge. He panders to the immediate present, and the result has a correspondingly short shelf life. He wants us to accept it as art, but it isn't; it's a political cartoon whose medium happens to be oil on canvas.

6 comments:

Chad Can Plan said...

Is it really good enough to be a political cartoon? In any case, as annoying as his message might be, it looks pretty. That's all that counts, right ;)
Further, I really don't understand how Obama is tearing up the Constitution. Even if you don't agree with the argument, could someone explain it to me?

Chad Can Plan said...

And what's his beef with Herbert Hoover? I mean, what did he do that was so wrong?
Also, wasn't Lincoln somewhat more disrespectful toward the constitution than Clinton or Obama?
And I don't know if Nixon is for or against the Constitution? Is George W Bush just a slack-jawed yokel in the picture too?

Matt said...

I dunno; there are pretty bad political cartoons out there--ones with messages less coherent than this one. I don't consider the bar all that high.

[sarcasm] See, Chad, there's a link entitled "What Has Obama Done?" that clearly and indisputably lays out Obama's constitutional violations. I'm surprised you didn't know that? [/sarcasm]

Don't get me started on the historical issues--although I'm sure you know them better than I do. But shouldn't FDR be, uh, sitting down?

I also love how angry Lincoln looks. He's got serious rage. If you press him further, he might just suspend habeas corpus. Or worse, he'll start with some emancipatin'!

k@ said...

I think this falls into the Propaganda subset of art and when I look at it in that context... well, it's still mediocre. I'll take "Rosie the Riveter" over this any day.
It takes a very talented individual to be able to insert an agenda into something they create without having it fall flat.

g said...

the forgotten man looks pretty down. i get that depressed too when i see money on the ground. i mean, do you pocket it and risk the searing guilt or leave it there knowing that the owner isn't ever coming back and the person who does pick it up can't possibly 'deserve' it as much as you. maybe divine providence herself dropped it on your path. you'll never know.

Matt said...

k: Yes. It's not even good as agitprop. If I may overuse the comparison, it's what would happen if Thomas Kinkade decided to stop painting light and to start painting dark, dark darkness.

g: I think you get a special award for funniest comment. Look at the emotional price of ethical dilemma!

Post a Comment