ART AND THE LABOUR MOVEMENT:
A MARRIAGE MADE IN MATERIALIST DETERMINISM
by Richard Russell.

Affordable digital technology is the best thing to happen to the working class since Jack Hobbs. We can all create; and rather a lot of us are rather good at it. Many in the culture industries are running scared. The myth that they already represented anyone who was good enough is blown. A nice narrow safe-brand market has been undermined by its own success: so many people bought Pink Floyd that no-one ever has to buy Pink Floyd again. Every method they've tried to get us to pay for digital proliferation has fallen flat on its greedy face. We will read twenty-first century novels whether the publishing houses say yea or nay. We will see twenty-first century movies whether Hollywood says yea or nay. Twenty-first century dance; twenty-first century drama; twenty-first century animation. The digital medium itself will bring us new art forms, new spectacles, new mirrors to the soul.

Once the culture of the labour movement is given full sail, the labour movement itself can start to improve its conditions. The days of passive consumption of pre-ordained commodities are seriously threatened. Social identity, aspects of alienation, improvement of civil rights develop as intrinsic parts of cultural discourse. Pick up thy word processor and walk. The economic structures aren't yet defined, but cyberspace is infinite. The early settlers are making rapid progress while the corporate dinosaurs must adapt or become extinct.

The happy-ever-after scenario is a working-class renaissance where hitherto isolated artists are given new exposure in a medium where they are on equal terms with the biggest global capitalism can offer. In turn, an increasingly sophisticated public takes a new interest in both traditional and expermental forms: acoustic music, fine painting, modern sculpture. The hamburger culture of the pretty young man releasing 'Unchained Melody' yet again gets marginalised and largely ignored.

Utopian? Moi !? One of the reasons we live in a tatty old country is that our predecessors didn't think grand enough or aim high enough with regards to this, their future. One of the reasons the young daub their monikers everywhere is because prefabricated concrete and Victorian railways need brightening up. More art on the streets ! Some of it might get trashed, but; if you really did leave a piano in every plastic-lit shopping centre you'd be amazed how many people would start playing Liszt. Captialism compartmentalised art in respect of the labour movement a long time ago. In exchange for our slavery we were allowed a few hours leisure time. This allowed us to indulge in diversions, usually unthreatening artefacts mass-produced by our brother workers. Huge numbers in today's working class know full well the difference between a chocolate-box Millais and a luscious Monet; between Johann or Richard Strauss; between 'Summer Holiday' and 'Holiday in the Sun'. Every day, someone in the working class toils away on a great work of art. Most of this stuff never sees the light of day because global mass-production hasn't finished selling Constable yet.The artist is given the choice: spend the majority of your precious time on shameless self-promotion to give yourself a slither of a chance of financial reimbursement; or just ignore the world and leave the stuff in the loft for your grandkids. Dali did the former and it paid off. JS Bach did the latter and that paid off as well.

Once upon a time pseudo-intellectuals would discuss the working class as some pitiful lumpen heap in need of guidance and enlightenment. We were spoon-fed Tchaikovsky; had Shakespeare served up to us like it was castor oil. The working class is already enlightened, and will continue to educate itself as it always has. The tools are getting better and more widely available. The working class we have is the biggest, most courageous, most talented creative force imaginable.

Previous
A4L's Soapbox is an occasional platform for discussion of topics within the A4L realm of interest.
The views expressed do not necessarily represent the stance of the organisation.