thenation--2020-05-21--Old Radical Truths: Hal Foster’s Theory of Art Criticism

It wasn ’ t predictable , when Hal Foster entered the art scene in the 1980s , that he ’ d make his mark as a fluently readable critic covering the beat .
He seemed destined then for the knottier realms of high theory , but it ’ s the jobbing critic we encounter in his latest book , What Comes After Farce ?
Art and Criticism at a Time of Debacle .
Foster first became known as the editor of the 1983 anthology The Anti-Aesthetic : Essays on Postmodern Culture , which did much to introduce art audiences to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ postmodernists like Jean Baudrillard and Marxists thinkers such as Fredric Jameson to postcolonial theory through Edward Said , mixing their reflections with writings by critics associated with the journal October , where he would soon become an editor .
When I found my way to art just a little bit later , The Anti-Aesthetic was required reading .
I assumed Foster was some distinguished academic ; only later did I realize he was barely older than I was and , far from being part of the professoriate , was a staffer at Art @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
: Art and Criticism at a Time of Debacle Motivating Foster in 1983 was the desire to separate a good from a bad postmodernism , or as he put it , “ a postmodernism of resistance and a postmodernism of reaction.
” But in the collection of his own essays published two years later , Recodings : Art , Spectacle , Cultural Politics , he worried that art would be reduced “ to a homogeneity in which real differences are reclaimed as so many minor deviations and in which freedom is reduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sheep of reaction really be distinguished from the goats of resistance as easily as he ’ d imagined ?
Stylistically , the differences were all too obvious between , say , the photographically oriented practices of the “ Pictures ” artists—Louise Lawler , Cindy Sherman—and others of whom he approved , artists who treat “ the public space , social representation or artistic language in which he or she intervenes as both a target and a weapon , ” and neo-expressionist painters like Julian Schnabel and Anselm Kiefer , who were anathematized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into kitsch .
But Foster ’ s attempt to compartmentalize their cultural politics seemed to founder under the pressure of the historical identity he had to acknowledge they shared .
In the face of this quandary , he called for an effort not to salvage the old truths , either of modernism or of the traditional European culture it had infiltrated , but rather , in a curious formulation , “ to invent new truths , or more precisely , to reinvent old truths radically.
” It ’ s a nice question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same old truth and a reinvented one .
Could you make out the difference between Cervantes ’ s Don Quixote and Pierre Menard ’ s ?
The distinction seems to be in the eye of the beholder .
In swiping at the so-called neo-expressionism of Francesco Clemente and Sandro Chia , among others , Foster made the visceral nature of his aversion clear .
Their work evoked something icky and almost unmentionable : “ Coprophilia is not just a motif here ; it is embedded in the very aesthetic of this art—an aesthetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as so much fecal stuff to mess with.
” Foster was quick to insist that it wasn ’ t the shit that bothered him , just that the two Italian painters seemed to be using it merely to play-act the old game of épater les bourgeois .
But it was the “ fecal ” aesthetic he dwelt on .
And in such a performance of subversion , he complained , “ the artist poses as the Defiler of Civilization—never the critic of any specific social order or political regime.
” But the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against his own preferred artists , who likewise mostly attacked , at least in his account , abstractions like “ a metaphysical order based on opposed terms ” ( Jenny Holzer and Peter Nadin ) and an idea of the image as something “ riven with ( conflicted ) motives ” and whose interpretations , “ far from neutral , use these motives ideologically ” ( Sherrie Levine ) .
Foster even summarized with apparent approval Richard Prince ’ s indulgent , noncritical stance toward the advertising imagery appropriated in his work : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the manipulations therein…but to catch seduction in the act , to savor his own fascination with such images—even as they manipulate him via insinuated desire.
” This forfeiture of control , of critical distance , is just what Foster found so reprehensible in neo-expressionism .
What ’ s the difference ?
It ’ s hard not to notice that most of the artists Foster likes in Recodings use photography as their primary medium , while many of those he dislikes make paintings .
Can it really be that paint just seems too messy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and reminds him of getting his hands dirty ?
People sometimes need to do a lot of sophisticated thinking to rationalize their visceral responses .
That was 35 years ago , when Foster was just 30 .
Since then he ’ s completed a PhD in art history with a dissertation on surrealism ( later the subject of his 1993 book Compulsive Beauty ) and enjoyed a garlanded academic career , briefly teaching at Cornell before returning to his alma mater , Princeton , in 1997 , where he ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not detached himself from the contemporary scene as a result .
In 2000 he began contributing regularly to the London Review of Books , mainly reporting on exhibitions in New York .
Even more than in the 1980s , he is intent on the idea not of theory or history but of criticism—citing it not only in the subtitle of his new book but also in the one just previous to it , Bad New Days : Art , Criticism , Emergency ( 2015 ) .
And he ’ s still intent on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bad New Days , almost nostalgically , “ I keep faith with the old idea of an avant-garde.
” I can ’ t help but think of the abstract painter first encountering the work of Jasper Johns , who ( according to the critic Leo Steinberg ) said disconsolately , “ I am still involved with the dream.
” Foster ’ s dream is of an avant-garde neither purely transgressive nor entirely utopian , whose task is rather “ to trace fractures that already exist ” in order “ to pressure them further.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ visual nor cognitive activities but haptic ones .
Foster wants an art he can be in touch with and that will , in turn , put him in touch with reality , with things as they are—and to give them a push that might affect some kind of reconfiguration .
It ’ s a diagnostic attitude but not without hope of intervention .
Perhaps that ’ s why his new book , organized in three parts , begins with a group of pieces ( under the rubric “ Terror and Transgression ” ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than on its reactivity to the general culture and its images—and especially to the kitschy rhetoric of our politics and what Richard Hofstadter famously called “ paranoid style , ” to the reduction of human beings to “ bare life , ” as Giorgio Agamben called the person withdrawn from the protection of the law .
Only then , having established how “ our emotional environment is poor and dangerous , ” in the words of the artist duo Claire Fontaine , does he aim to show ( again quoting their words ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change it , but it can transcribe it.
” He does this first in a section titled “ Plutocracy and Display , ” on what can roughly be called gallery art—focusing on curators and museums and paintings and sculpture by practitioners like Jeff Koons and Kerry James Marshall—and then in the final part of the book on , mostly , media art : film and video and the like by Harun Farocki , Trevor Paglen , Hito Steyerl , and others .
That last section is called “ Media and Fiction ” —fiction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to justify the inclusion here of a marvelous essay that just barely seems to fit in , on the novelist William Gaddis , but which Foster was right to squeeze in because its vim and erudite enthusiasm cast a warming glow over the whole book .
In all , there are 18 brief essays— “ bulletins , ” as Foster calls them , “ drafted over the last fifteen years , a period punctuated by the financial crisis of 2008 and the perpetual catastrophe that is Trump.
” Foster ’ s writing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sociopolitical trends of the time , but it ’ s not clear what scope this leaves him to understand the art he writes about as anything more than symptomatic .
He begins with the problem of how to memorialize traumatic events—specifically , the attacks of September 11 , 2001 , though the terms of the discussion inevitably recall debates around the memorialization of the Shoah .
Objects in photographs by Francesc Torres of remains from Ground Zero “ seem both significant and meaningless , auratic and empty ” —a description that also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s installations with piles of old clothes and his photographs of anonymous faces from concentration camps .
In Foster ’ s eyes , this kind of auratic emptiness betrays an “ oppressive sublimity , ” a turn to the sacred that can never be benign .
I share his distrust of this aesthetic strategy but not because of a presumption that the sacred or sublime are in themselves illegitimate ; if Foster is convinced they are , then I wish he had made at least the beginnings of an argument about this rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ sublime ” as cuss words .
It ’ s only because the experiences such words point to can be so powerful that they can be used so manipulatively—but a life in which they have been abolished would be one of utter social and emotional poverty .
One name for an art that stokes powerful feelings in order to manipulate people is “ kitsch.
” Foster has an eye for political kitsch , such as the recurrence during the second Gulf War of the yellow ribbon symbol that had previously been promoted during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a symbol urging support , as Foster says , “ less for any troops than for an administration whose adventures were hardly in their best interest.
” But I don ’ t think he fully acknowledges just how deep the currents of kitsch might run once you start to trace them .
Are any of us immune ?
He approvingly quotes a famous passage from Milan Kundera ’ s The Unbearable Lightness of Being : What Foster notices no more than Kundera did is that this reflective structure , that of self-consciousness itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuzzy , feel-good sentiments .
We can become self-indulgent in nursing our revulsion and resentment , too—for instance , our disgust at a president who acts , in Foster ’ s words ( alluding to Freud ) , “ as a throwback primal father ( the bully-in-chief ) , ” and at the “ legions of white guys who want to be his apprentices.
” This feeling of repugnance is immediate , but then there might come a reflexive moment : How good it is to be moved by repugnance at all this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to thereby find oneself among those who see through the illusion , who know better than to aspire to follow the tinpot dictator .
On the Ground and in the Airwaves The New MoMA Is a Work In Progress What ’ s Wrong With the New Figurative Painting ?
A pharisaical self-congratulation on being part of the righteous remnant is what might be called the kitsch of political critique .
Foster , I hasten to add , is no more prone to this fault than any of us are .
But when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of What Comes After Farce ?
, Foster is working more in the vein of punditry than of criticism strictly speaking , the temptation becomes all the more irresistible , and perhaps that ’ s why all the rhetoric of trauma and transgression ( which is the rhetoric of expressionism , I should add , despite a younger Foster ’ s damning critique of expressionist art ) leads only to anodyne pronouncements such as “ We should not let bad actors get a free pass where they should be most held to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formulation hardly more incisive than the urge to “ support our troops ” or even Kundera ’ s “ idiotic tautology ‘ Long live life !
’ ” Artists often get their most trenchant effects by playing on the edge of kitsch .
As alert as he is to kitsch ’ s manifestations in public discourse , Foster ’ s spirit of seriousness sometimes leads him to overlook the way art flirts with it .
Typical is an essay on Paul Chan ’ s recent sculptures using tubular balloon-like forms animated by electric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like human figures , ” as Foster says , “ and the next like garbage bags caught in the wind.
” Chan calls these works “ breathers , ” and Foster offers a perceptive commentary teasing out the artist ’ s references to classical philosophy but also flags a possible topical reference to the killing of Eric Garner .
( If he were writing today , he might mention Covid-19 and our desperate need for respirators . )
What Foster doesn ’ t discuss is the fact that Chan ’ s sculptures are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they could easily be dismissed as flimflam or gimmickry—they appear , after all , to be little more than customized versions of those “ air dancers ” or “ tube men ” familiar to anyone who has driven down a state highway lined with retail outlets .
The snappy , unpredictable movements of these air-activated figures are reliably attention-grabbing .
Every used-car dealer seems to have one .
Clement Greenberg once observed that kitsch is “ essentially its own salesman , ” and no less could be said of Chan ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to such flailing figures than their noticeability ?
Is their literal emptiness also a void of significance ?
There ’ s a great vulnerability in what Foster describes as an “ image , never fixed in meaning , ” that is “ reanimated by each present that conjures it up.
” But he never makes it clear why one image rather than another comes to be reanimated .
I ’ d say it ’ s the very undecidability of the work that creates its emotional impact , by shaking one ’ s confidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vehicle of communication and in one ’ s own responses to it .
While he seems to believe that an affective response to art is somehow distinct from a qualitative or critical one , it ’ s precisely the poignancy of the almost-empty , almost-kitsch artwork that gives it its critical as well as its emotional impact .
A shrewder and , dare I say , more affecting analysis of the art/kitsch interface can be found in Foster ’ s essay on Claire Fontaine , a “ readymade artist ” ( though I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an invented artist ) who is the creation of Fulvia Carnevale and James Thornhill .
Their work is very insider-ish , often made by giving small but significant twists to the work of other artists—Foster mentions Bruce Nauman , Ed Ruscha , Felix Gonzalez-Torres , and Richard Prince as examples of their targets .
Like Chan ’ s breathers , Claire Fontaine as a fictional creation has , as Foster says , an “ empty center , ” being a sort of brand ( at one remove , since the name comes from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than an artist .
Yet Foster—who refers to Claire Fontaine as “ her ” rather than “ them ” —very definitely treats the duo as a single artist or at least an author , quoting extensively from their writings and interviews more than analyzing the objects they exhibit .
But with good reason , as the pair explain : “ Words are in charge of bringing the spectator to the metaphysical wasteland ” that is the subject of their work , which shuttles unpredictably between cynicism and protest , with “ rhetorical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come ” —thus a merely rhetorical mutiny .
And some of Claire Fontaine ’ s work has a cutting wit that renders its own impasse with stunning imagistic precision .
Foster identifies one example : Change ( 2006 ) is a set of American quarters that have been transformed by being fitted with little crescent-shaped box-cutter blades As Foster points out , it ’ s a kind of cedilla , the diacritical mark that shifts the sound value of the French letter C from hard to soft .
But it speaks of revolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hammer and sickle ) , though it also evokes , as he says , death ’ s scythe .
The pun in the title bears out , but is the change hopeful or horrifying ?
E pluribus unum—out of many meanings , one object .
Claire Fontaine ’ s work , like that of many of the artists Foster appreciates , functions semiotically—it appeals to the mind without much of a detour through the senses .
His interpretations of such works are lucid .
But the limits of his approach become more apparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an intellectual significance that is inextricably tied to its sensorial richness .
He commends Kerry James Marshall for producing paintings in which there are art-historical references aplenty , although they are “ mostly subtextual in the work and subliminal in the viewer.
” But the referential dimension is practically all he talks about , leaving the reader to wonder how he feels about what ’ s happened through the painting of the painting .
Foster doesn ’ t convey that in Marshall ’ s work , the “ how ” of it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his paintings give so much pleasure that the real intellectual complexities Foster rightly sees in them matter so much .
What ’ s curious is that while Foster ’ s indifference to the affective and sensual side of art imposes considerable limitations on his interpretations of particular works , it hardly makes his writing less attractive .
The clarity of his prose is satisfying in itself , and while he hardly spares his learning , he displays it lightly and clearly .
While I was reading What Comes After Farce ?
I felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the most skillful critics at work today .
But afterward I had to reflect on the fact that his relationship to art is so one-sided .
That hardly prevents me from enjoying or learning from his essays .
But I do suspect that , like the art of Claire Fontaine , his writing , for all that it insists on the idea of the common or the commonplace , is ultimately for insiders .
He quotes Claire Fontaine : “ Art deals with desires and poses the question of pleasure in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book as a whole , weighed down as it is , understandably enough , by “ the ambient nihilism of the neoliberal order , ” pleasure is only ever mentioned in quotation marks .

It wasn’t predictable, when Hal Foster entered the art scene in the 1980s, that he’d make his mark as a fluently readable critic covering the beat. He seemed destined then for the knottier realms of high theory, but it’s the jobbing critic we encounter in his latest book, What Comes After Farce? Art and Criticism at a Time of Debacle. Foster first became known as the editor of the 1983 anthology The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, which did much to introduce art audiences to a range of cultural theorists, from postmodernists like Jean Baudrillard and Marxists thinkers such as Fredric Jameson to postcolonial theory through Edward Said, mixing their reflections with writings by critics associated with the journal October, where he would soon become an editor. When I found my way to art just a little bit later, The Anti-Aesthetic was required reading. I assumed Foster was some distinguished academic; only later did I realize he was barely older than I was and, far from being part of the professoriate, was a staffer at Art in America. Books in Review What Comes After Farce?: Art and Criticism at a Time of Debacle By Hal Foster Buy this book
Motivating Foster in 1983 was the desire to separate a good from a bad postmodernism, or as he put it, “a postmodernism of resistance and a postmodernism of reaction.” But in the collection of his own essays published two years later, Recodings: Art, Spectacle, Cultural Politics, he worried that art would be reduced “to a homogeneity in which real differences are reclaimed as so many minor deviations and in which freedom is reduced to so many isolated gestures.” Could the sheep of reaction really be distinguished from the goats of resistance as easily as he’d imagined? Stylistically, the differences were all too obvious between, say, the photographically oriented practices of the “Pictures” artists—Louise Lawler, Cindy Sherman—and others of whom he approved, artists who treat “the public space, social representation or artistic language in which he or she intervenes as both a target and a weapon,” and neo-expressionist painters like Julian Schnabel and Anselm Kiefer, who were anathematized as regressive, turning familiar art-historical tropes into kitsch. But Foster’s attempt to compartmentalize their cultural politics seemed to founder under the pressure of the historical identity he had to acknowledge they shared. In the face of this quandary, he called for an effort not to salvage the old truths, either of modernism or of the traditional European culture it had infiltrated, but rather, in a curious formulation, “to invent new truths, or more precisely, to reinvent old truths radically.”
It’s a nice question, how to tell the difference between the same old truth and a reinvented one. Could you make out the difference between Cervantes’s Don Quixote and Pierre Menard’s? The distinction seems to be in the eye of the beholder. In swiping at the so-called neo-expressionism of Francesco Clemente and Sandro Chia, among others, Foster made the visceral nature of his aversion clear. Their work evoked something icky and almost unmentionable: “Coprophilia is not just a motif here; it is embedded in the very aesthetic of this art—an aesthetic that regards history simply as style, as so much fecal stuff to mess with.” Foster was quick to insist that it wasn’t the shit that bothered him, just that the two Italian painters seemed to be using it merely to play-act the old game of épater les bourgeois. But it was the “fecal” aesthetic he dwelt on. And in such a performance of subversion, he complained, “the artist poses as the Defiler of Civilization—never the critic of any specific social order or political regime.” But the same charge could as easily have been turned against his own preferred artists, who likewise mostly attacked, at least in his account, abstractions like “a metaphysical order based on opposed terms” (Jenny Holzer and Peter Nadin) and an idea of the image as something “riven with (conflicted) motives” and whose interpretations, “far from neutral, use these motives ideologically” (Sherrie Levine). Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
Foster even summarized with apparent approval Richard Prince’s indulgent, noncritical stance toward the advertising imagery appropriated in his work: “He does this not to expose the manipulations therein…but to catch seduction in the act, to savor his own fascination with such images—even as they manipulate him via insinuated desire.” This forfeiture of control, of critical distance, is just what Foster found so reprehensible in neo-expressionism. What’s the difference? It’s hard not to notice that most of the artists Foster likes in Recodings use photography as their primary medium, while many of those he dislikes make paintings. Can it really be that paint just seems too messy, “so much fecal stuff,” and reminds him of getting his hands dirty? People sometimes need to do a lot of sophisticated thinking to rationalize their visceral responses.
That was 35 years ago, when Foster was just 30. Since then he’s completed a PhD in art history with a dissertation on surrealism (later the subject of his 1993 book Compulsive Beauty) and enjoyed a garlanded academic career, briefly teaching at Cornell before returning to his alma mater, Princeton, in 1997, where he’s been settled ever since. But he has not detached himself from the contemporary scene as a result. In 2000 he began contributing regularly to the London Review of Books, mainly reporting on exhibitions in New York. Even more than in the 1980s, he is intent on the idea not of theory or history but of criticism—citing it not only in the subtitle of his new book but also in the one just previous to it, Bad New Days: Art, Criticism, Emergency (2015). And he’s still intent on old truths reconceived radically, proclaiming in Bad New Days, almost nostalgically, “I keep faith with the old idea of an avant-garde.” I can’t help but think of the abstract painter first encountering the work of Jasper Johns, who (according to the critic Leo Steinberg) said disconsolately, “I am still involved with the dream.” Foster’s dream is of an avant-garde neither purely transgressive nor entirely utopian, whose task is rather “to trace fractures that already exist” in order “to pressure them further.”
Tracing and pressuring sound like neither visual nor cognitive activities but haptic ones. Foster wants an art he can be in touch with and that will, in turn, put him in touch with reality, with things as they are—and to give them a push that might affect some kind of reconfiguration. It’s a diagnostic attitude but not without hope of intervention. Perhaps that’s why his new book, organized in three parts, begins with a group of pieces (under the rubric “Terror and Transgression”) that focus less on art as such than on its reactivity to the general culture and its images—and especially to the kitschy rhetoric of our politics and what Richard Hofstadter famously called “paranoid style,” to the reduction of human beings to “bare life,” as Giorgio Agamben called the person withdrawn from the protection of the law.
Only then, having established how “our emotional environment is poor and dangerous,” in the words of the artist duo Claire Fontaine, does he aim to show (again quoting their words) how “artistic work can’t change it, but it can transcribe it.” He does this first in a section titled “Plutocracy and Display,” on what can roughly be called gallery art—focusing on curators and museums and paintings and sculpture by practitioners like Jeff Koons and Kerry James Marshall—and then in the final part of the book on, mostly, media art: film and video and the like by Harun Farocki, Trevor Paglen, Hito Steyerl, and others. That last section is called “Media and Fiction”—fiction being mentioned in part, I suppose, to justify the inclusion here of a marvelous essay that just barely seems to fit in, on the novelist William Gaddis, but which Foster was right to squeeze in because its vim and erudite enthusiasm cast a warming glow over the whole book. In all, there are 18 brief essays—“bulletins,” as Foster calls them, “drafted over the last fifteen years, a period punctuated by the financial crisis of 2008 and the perpetual catastrophe that is Trump.” Current Issue View our current issue
Foster’s writing is energized by his oppositional engagement with the sociopolitical trends of the time, but it’s not clear what scope this leaves him to understand the art he writes about as anything more than symptomatic. He begins with the problem of how to memorialize traumatic events—specifically, the attacks of September 11, 2001, though the terms of the discussion inevitably recall debates around the memorialization of the Shoah. Objects in photographs by Francesc Torres of remains from Ground Zero “seem both significant and meaningless, auratic and empty”—a description that also made me think of Christian Boltanski’s installations with piles of old clothes and his photographs of anonymous faces from concentration camps. In Foster’s eyes, this kind of auratic emptiness betrays an “oppressive sublimity,” a turn to the sacred that can never be benign. I share his distrust of this aesthetic strategy but not because of a presumption that the sacred or sublime are in themselves illegitimate; if Foster is convinced they are, then I wish he had made at least the beginnings of an argument about this rather than simply using “sacred” and “sublime” as cuss words. It’s only because the experiences such words point to can be so powerful that they can be used so manipulatively—but a life in which they have been abolished would be one of utter social and emotional poverty.
One name for an art that stokes powerful feelings in order to manipulate people is “kitsch.” Foster has an eye for political kitsch, such as the recurrence during the second Gulf War of the yellow ribbon symbol that had previously been promoted during the Iran hostage crisis of 1979: a symbol urging support, as Foster says, “less for any troops than for an administration whose adventures were hardly in their best interest.” But I don’t think he fully acknowledges just how deep the currents of kitsch might run once you start to trace them. Are any of us immune? He approvingly quotes a famous passage from Milan Kundera’s The Unbearable Lightness of Being:
Kitsch causes two tears to flow in quick succession. The first tear says: How nice to see children running on the grass! The second tear says: How nice to be moved, together with all mankind, by children running on the grass! It is the second tear that makes kitsch kitsch.
What Foster notices no more than Kundera did is that this reflective structure, that of self-consciousness itself, is hardly limited to positive, fuzzy, feel-good sentiments. We can become self-indulgent in nursing our revulsion and resentment, too—for instance, our disgust at a president who acts, in Foster’s words (alluding to Freud), “as a throwback primal father (the bully-in-chief),” and at the “legions of white guys who want to be his apprentices.” This feeling of repugnance is immediate, but then there might come a reflexive moment: How good it is to be moved by repugnance at all this, the bien-pensant liberal might think, and to thereby find oneself among those who see through the illusion, who know better than to aspire to follow the tinpot dictator. More From Barry Schwabsky The Unsettled Life and Art of Jimmie Durham June 21, 2023 A New Continuum of Art History at the Carnegie International March 23, 2023 Nan Goldin’s Life Between Art and Activism March 4, 2023
A pharisaical self-congratulation on being part of the righteous remnant is what might be called the kitsch of political critique. Foster, I hasten to add, is no more prone to this fault than any of us are. But when, as in much of the first part of What Comes After Farce?, Foster is working more in the vein of punditry than of criticism strictly speaking, the temptation becomes all the more irresistible, and perhaps that’s why all the rhetoric of trauma and transgression (which is the rhetoric of expressionism, I should add, despite a younger Foster’s damning critique of expressionist art) leads only to anodyne pronouncements such as “We should not let bad actors get a free pass where they should be most held to account…in the political realm,” a formulation hardly more incisive than the urge to “support our troops” or even Kundera’s “idiotic tautology ‘Long live life!’”
Artists often get their most trenchant effects by playing on the edge of kitsch. As alert as he is to kitsch’s manifestations in public discourse, Foster’s spirit of seriousness sometimes leads him to overlook the way art flirts with it. Typical is an essay on Paul Chan’s recent sculptures using tubular balloon-like forms animated by electric fans. “One moment they look like human figures,” as Foster says, “and the next like garbage bags caught in the wind.” Chan calls these works “breathers,” and Foster offers a perceptive commentary teasing out the artist’s references to classical philosophy but also flags a possible topical reference to the killing of Eric Garner. (If he were writing today, he might mention Covid-19 and our desperate need for respirators.) What Foster doesn’t discuss is the fact that Chan’s sculptures are made the more poignant by the fact that they could easily be dismissed as flimflam or gimmickry—they appear, after all, to be little more than customized versions of those “air dancers” or “tube men” familiar to anyone who has driven down a state highway lined with retail outlets. The snappy, unpredictable movements of these air-activated figures are reliably attention-grabbing. Every used-car dealer seems to have one.
Clement Greenberg once observed that kitsch is “essentially its own salesman,” and no less could be said of Chan’s tube people. Is there anything more to such flailing figures than their noticeability? Is their literal emptiness also a void of significance? There’s a great vulnerability in what Foster describes as an “image, never fixed in meaning,” that is “reanimated by each present that conjures it up.” But he never makes it clear why one image rather than another comes to be reanimated. I’d say it’s the very undecidability of the work that creates its emotional impact, by shaking one’s confidence both in the object itself as a vehicle of communication and in one’s own responses to it. While he seems to believe that an affective response to art is somehow distinct from a qualitative or critical one, it’s precisely the poignancy of the almost-empty, almost-kitsch artwork that gives it its critical as well as its emotional impact.
A shrewder and, dare I say, more affecting analysis of the art/kitsch interface can be found in Foster’s essay on Claire Fontaine, a “readymade artist” (though I would have said just the opposite, an invented artist) who is the creation of Fulvia Carnevale and James Thornhill. Their work is very insider-ish, often made by giving small but significant twists to the work of other artists—Foster mentions Bruce Nauman, Ed Ruscha, Felix Gonzalez-Torres, and Richard Prince as examples of their targets. Like Chan’s breathers, Claire Fontaine as a fictional creation has, as Foster says, an “empty center,” being a sort of brand (at one remove, since the name comes from that of a French stationery company) more than an artist. Yet Foster—who refers to Claire Fontaine as “her” rather than “them”—very definitely treats the duo as a single artist or at least an author, quoting extensively from their writings and interviews more than analyzing the objects they exhibit. But with good reason, as the pair explain: “Words are in charge of bringing the spectator to the metaphysical wasteland” that is the subject of their work, which shuttles unpredictably between cynicism and protest, with “rhetorical shortcuts” to “a mutiny to come”—thus a merely rhetorical mutiny. And some of Claire Fontaine’s work has a cutting wit that renders its own impasse with stunning imagistic precision. Foster identifies one example: Change (2006) is a set of American quarters that have been transformed by being fitted with little crescent-shaped box-cutter blades As Foster points out, it’s a kind of cedilla, the diacritical mark that shifts the sound value of the French letter C from hard to soft. But it speaks of revolution (Foster might have cited the proletarian hammer and sickle), though it also evokes, as he says, death’s scythe. The pun in the title bears out, but is the change hopeful or horrifying? E pluribus unum—out of many meanings, one object.
Claire Fontaine’s work, like that of many of the artists Foster appreciates, functions semiotically—it appeals to the mind without much of a detour through the senses. His interpretations of such works are lucid. But the limits of his approach become more apparent when he discusses artists whose work has an intellectual significance that is inextricably tied to its sensorial richness. He commends Kerry James Marshall for producing paintings in which there are art-historical references aplenty, although they are “mostly subtextual in the work and subliminal in the viewer.” But the referential dimension is practically all he talks about, leaving the reader to wonder how he feels about what’s happened through the painting of the painting. Foster doesn’t convey that in Marshall’s work, the “how” of it is wonderful, and it’s because his paintings give so much pleasure that the real intellectual complexities Foster rightly sees in them matter so much.
What’s curious is that while Foster’s indifference to the affective and sensual side of art imposes considerable limitations on his interpretations of particular works, it hardly makes his writing less attractive. The clarity of his prose is satisfying in itself, and while he hardly spares his learning, he displays it lightly and clearly. While I was reading What Comes After Farce? I felt that I was in the hands of one of the most skillful critics at work today. But afterward I had to reflect on the fact that his relationship to art is so one-sided. That hardly prevents me from enjoying or learning from his essays. But I do suspect that, like the art of Claire Fontaine, his writing, for all that it insists on the idea of the common or the commonplace, is ultimately for insiders. He quotes Claire Fontaine: “Art deals with desires and poses the question of pleasure in an impertinent way.” But in the book as a whole, weighed down as it is, understandably enough, by “the ambient nihilism of the neoliberal order,” pleasure is only ever mentioned in quotation marks.


thenation--2020-05-21--You Can’t Mask Stupid

You Can’t Mask Stupid

The state of Texas , which has implemented some of the most aggressive “ reopening ” strategies so far , experienced its largest single-day jump in reported coronavirus cases over the weekend .
The state of Georgia , which was one of the first states to reopen , is such a mess that the state government was caught trying to mislead people about the direction cases are trending .
The thing that experts predicted would happen as states reopen appears to be happening : People are getting sick .
That ’ s a terrifying problem , now that , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ begun to lift their lockdowns .
The pandemic isn ’ t “ over , ” but the country ’ s patience has apparently run out .
People are willing to risk their lives to get their hair cut , and state governments have decided to let them .
When reached for comment , Covid-19 took the form of Al Pacino and said : “ Vanity , definitely my favorite sin.
” It ’ s tempting to conclude that the newly infected deserve their fate .
There ’ s a video going around of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Tex.
, for “ Go Topless Jeep Weekend ” ( the lack of punctuation is important , I believe ) and I ’ m hard-pressed to find anybody in the video who should be allowed back into the gene pool .
Watching these dispatches , there ’ s a hope that only the people who seem to be trying to get sick will get sick , that it ’ s their choice to be irrational , and , if that ’ s the case , that we should all be quiet while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Unfortunately , that ’ s not how our society works .
That ’ s not how communicable diseases work .
That ’ s not how any of this works .
Cell phone data shows that the small groups of largely white confederates who have attended anti-lockdown protests spread themselves across hundreds of miles , even into neighboring states , within 48 hours of attending one of their Covid parties .
And , of course , the people most likely to congregate in large groups without wearing a mask are also the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local grocery store or Costco without wearing a mask , sneeze on your potential purchases , and then amble off in search of more “ freedom ” while leaving sickness and death in their wake .
Quite simply : It ’ s the people who are most vocal about wanting the country to reopen who are making it too dangerous to reopen the country .
It ’ s the people who are least concerned about their own health who are putting everybody else ’ s health at risk .
The only rational response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by social distancing guidelines is for people who want to protect themselves to shelter in place even longer .
At this point , even if the government provided widespread testing ( which it still has not ) and these people knew they had Covid , I wouldn ’ t trust them to stay inside .
Society is only as strong as its weakest link , and right now our weakest links are showing themselves to be literal mouth breathers who can ’ t be bothered to cover their faces .
The problem is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to everybody equally .
For the most part , the people who want the stores and bars and beaches open are not the people who have to work at the stores and bars and beaches .
The people who refuse to serve the greater good by wearing a mask demand service .
Every time a business is badgered into opening , there ’ s a whole host of people who are pressed into service : not just the employees of that business but also the many folks who make up our whole societal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , parking valets .
Scores of humans have to risk their health just so a Trump voter can drink unobstructed by a face mask until they puke into a trashcan .
If these people were serious about restoring economic activity for the workers in need of a paycheck , rather than just for their own personal enjoyment , then they ’ d be begging to wear a mask so that those workers could return to their jobs as safely as possible .
They ’ d be begging to stay six feet apart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look out for each other .
If everybody could just be smart and follow the rules , we might be at a point where limited social engagement and economic activity could be possible without causing a dramatic spike in disease .
People could take their tops off if they would just keep their masks on .
We could go to the beach and even spend money if people would just use the giant ocean to maintain social distance .
If we were smart and careful , we might not have to spend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can ’ t have these nice things because we have too many selfish people spoiling it for everybody else .
We can ’ t manage the crisis , because too many people have decided to be unmanageable .
We are slowly beginning to understand how to protect ourselves from the virus .
But we have no clue how to protect ourselves from the virulent people who insist on spreading the virus because they ’ ve determined they can live with other people dying .
A person walking around without a mask isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t care about their own life ; they ’ re shouting that they don ’ t care about yours .
They ’ re willing to be the one who kills you , because they don ’ t value anybody ’ s life but their own .
The most aggressive reopeners know exactly whose lives they aren ’ t interested in protecting : black and brown people , old people , and working people .
The Washington Post grabbed some quotes from giddy “ reopeners ” gathered in crowds without protective equipment outside a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ examples of people saying the quiet part aloud : Jeff Lampel is right about one thing : He and his friend are selfish idiots .
The calculus by these two guys is instructive .
The costs and risks of reopening are not borne by the people clamoring for it , and they know it .
Nikole Hannah Jones ( the Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter behind The 1619 Project ) has said that the push to reopening is “ linked to the belief that Covid is disproportionately killing black and brown folks.
” It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tweedledee and Tweedledum can get together and drool on each other on a sunny day .
The only thing that allows them to be so unbothered and so unwilling to take minimum precautions is their belief about who is really getting sick .
I can ’ t fix these people .
I can ’ t educate them .
I can ’ t teach them to care about somebody other than themselves .
In some deep , vengeful part of my brain , I might hope that they get sick—sick enough to realize the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t solve anything .
Covid can not fill the gaping hole where their empathy is supposed to be ; it will just add to their endless reserves of self-pity .
All I can do is protect myself from them .
And that involves staying inside for as long as I possibly can .
That stinks for me .
And it stinks for the businesses that need my consumerism .
There is economic activity that I would like to engage in .
I would like to take my kids to the ice cream truck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ d like to sue the ice cream truck for making me Daddy Bad Guy when I tell my kids we can not answer its siren song ) .
But I can ’ t .
I can ’ t risk some maskless MAGA bro standing right behind us in line and launching into a spittle-hurling “ it ’ s a hoax ” rant when I politely ask him to take two steps back from my family .
It ’ s a privilege to be able to stay inside .
Outside , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who don ’ t care if they live or die .
But working people will not go down without a fight .
The antidote to the Topless Jeep people is this hero Costco employee who barred a disease vector who refused to wear a mask from entering the store .
We can only hope businesses that take seriously the health and safety of their employees and customers will be rewarded , while people who only care about themselves will be ostracized to their Chick-Fil-A and NASCAR infields .
Right now , my house @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe from the idiots .
As we reopen , I ’ ll only be going to the places that promise to keep me safe from them .

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Nation believes that helping readers stay informed about the impact of the coronavirus crisis is a form of public service. For that reason, this article, and all of our coronavirus coverage, is now free. Please subscribe to support our writers and staff, and stay healthy.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
The state of Texas, which has implemented some of the most aggressive “reopening” strategies so far, experienced its largest single-day jump in reported coronavirus cases over the weekend. The state of Georgia, which was one of the first states to reopen, is such a mess that the state government was caught trying to mislead people about the direction cases are trending. The thing that experts predicted would happen as states reopen appears to be happening: People are getting sick.
That’s a terrifying problem, now that, as of yesterday, all 50 states have begun to lift their lockdowns. The pandemic isn’t “over,” but the country’s patience has apparently run out. People are willing to risk their lives to get their hair cut, and state governments have decided to let them. When reached for comment, Covid-19 took the form of Al Pacino and said: “Vanity, definitely my favorite sin.”
It’s tempting to conclude that the newly infected deserve their fate. There’s a video going around of people gathering on a beach in Galveston, Tex., for “Go Topless Jeep Weekend” (the lack of punctuation is important, I believe) and I’m hard-pressed to find anybody in the video who should be allowed back into the gene pool. Watching these dispatches, there’s a hope that only the people who seem to be trying to get sick will get sick, that it’s their choice to be irrational, and, if that’s the case, that we should all be quiet while Darwin’s theory does its work.
Unfortunately, that’s not how our society works. That’s not how communicable diseases work. That’s not how any of this works. Cell phone data shows that the small groups of largely white confederates who have attended anti-lockdown protests spread themselves across hundreds of miles, even into neighboring states, within 48 hours of attending one of their Covid parties. And, of course, the people most likely to congregate in large groups without wearing a mask are also the people most likely to show up at your local grocery store or Costco without wearing a mask, sneeze on your potential purchases, and then amble off in search of more “freedom” while leaving sickness and death in their wake.
Quite simply: It’s the people who are most vocal about wanting the country to reopen who are making it too dangerous to reopen the country. It’s the people who are least concerned about their own health who are putting everybody else’s health at risk.
The only rational response to these people who refuse to abide by social distancing guidelines is for people who want to protect themselves to shelter in place even longer. At this point, even if the government provided widespread testing (which it still has not) and these people knew they had Covid, I wouldn’t trust them to stay inside. Society is only as strong as its weakest link, and right now our weakest links are showing themselves to be literal mouth breathers who can’t be bothered to cover their faces. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
The problem is that the rational response is not available to everybody equally. For the most part, the people who want the stores and bars and beaches open are not the people who have to work at the stores and bars and beaches. The people who refuse to serve the greater good by wearing a mask demand service. Every time a business is badgered into opening, there’s a whole host of people who are pressed into service: not just the employees of that business but also the many folks who make up our whole societal support apparatus—police, sanitation workers, transit workers, parking valets. Scores of humans have to risk their health just so a Trump voter can drink unobstructed by a face mask until they puke into a trashcan. Current Issue View our current issue
If these people were serious about restoring economic activity for the workers in need of a paycheck, rather than just for their own personal enjoyment, then they’d be begging to wear a mask so that those workers could return to their jobs as safely as possible. They’d be begging to stay six feet apart to show that Americans can be trusted to look out for each other. If everybody could just be smart and follow the rules, we might be at a point where limited social engagement and economic activity could be possible without causing a dramatic spike in disease. People could take their tops off if they would just keep their masks on. We could go to the beach and even spend money if people would just use the giant ocean to maintain social distance. If we were smart and careful, we might not have to spend the summer completely alone and afraid.
We can’t have these nice things because we have too many selfish people spoiling it for everybody else. We can’t manage the crisis, because too many people have decided to be unmanageable. We are slowly beginning to understand how to protect ourselves from the virus. But we have no clue how to protect ourselves from the virulent people who insist on spreading the virus because they’ve determined they can live with other people dying. A person walking around without a mask isn’t telegraphing that they don’t care about their own life; they’re shouting that they don’t care about yours. They’re willing to be the one who kills you, because they don’t value anybody’s life but their own.
The most aggressive reopeners know exactly whose lives they aren’t interested in protecting: black and brown people, old people, and working people. The Washington Post grabbed some quotes from giddy “reopeners” gathered in crowds without protective equipment outside a Georgia mall. The quotes are breathtaking examples of people saying the quiet part aloud:
“I think you have to live life,” said Jeff Lampel, taking a sip of beer. “When you start seeing where the cases are coming from and the demographics—I’m not worried,” agreed his friend Scott Friedel. “I know what people are going to say—‘Those selfish idiots are killing our old people!’” said Lampel. “How do you give up a day like this—really, how?” Friedel said, enjoying the last rays of sun as the music kept playing and the crowds kept coming.
Jeff Lampel is right about one thing: He and his friend are selfish idiots.
The calculus by these two guys is instructive. The costs and risks of reopening are not borne by the people clamoring for it, and they know it. Nikole Hannah Jones (the Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter behind The 1619 Project) has said that the push to reopening is “linked to the belief that Covid is disproportionately killing black and brown folks.” It’s objectively insane to risk lives so Tweedledee and Tweedledum can get together and drool on each other on a sunny day. The only thing that allows them to be so unbothered and so unwilling to take minimum precautions is their belief about who is really getting sick.
I can’t fix these people. I can’t educate them. I can’t teach them to care about somebody other than themselves. In some deep, vengeful part of my brain, I might hope that they get sick—sick enough to realize the error of their ways—but that wouldn’t solve anything. Covid cannot fill the gaping hole where their empathy is supposed to be; it will just add to their endless reserves of self-pity. More on Covid-19 How Stanford Lost Its Soul Jeet Heer Trump’s Crackpot Claims Are a Distraction—and We’re Taking the Bait Joan Walsh
All I can do is protect myself from them. And that involves staying inside for as long as I possibly can. That stinks for me. And it stinks for the businesses that need my consumerism. There is economic activity that I would like to engage in. I would like to take my kids to the ice cream truck (or, at the very least, I’d like to sue the ice cream truck for making me Daddy Bad Guy when I tell my kids we cannot answer its siren song). But I can’t. I can’t risk some maskless MAGA bro standing right behind us in line and launching into a spittle-hurling “it’s a hoax” rant when I politely ask him to take two steps back from my family.
It’s a privilege to be able to stay inside. Outside, working people have no refuge from customers who don’t care if they live or die.
But working people will not go down without a fight. The antidote to the Topless Jeep people is this hero Costco employee who barred a disease vector who refused to wear a mask from continuing to shop. We can only hope businesses that take seriously the health and safety of their employees and customers will be rewarded, while people who only care about themselves will be ostracized to their Chick-Fil-A and NASCAR infields.
Right now, my house is the only place where I feel safe from the idiots. As we reopen, I’ll only be going to the places that promise to keep me safe from them.


thenation--2020-05-21--It’s Time for Congress to Fund a Different Kind of Fight

The coronavirus pandemic and the economic meltdown extending from it are reframing our understanding of what endangers us .
We now know that the greatest threat facing the United States is not some foreign adversary but a virus .
Yet our budget priorities do not reflect this new reality .
House Progressive Caucus cochair Mark Pocan wants to correct that imbalance .
“ The enemy we ’ re fighting right now is COVID-19 , so our sole focus should be on expanding testing , tracing and treatment , funding towards vaccine development , and relief for the American people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending now would be a slap in the face to the families of over 90,000 Americans that have died from this virus.
” With Representative Barbara Lee , Pocan is leading a group of Democratic lawmakers in calling on the House Armed Services Committee members who will draft this year ’ s National Defense Authorization Act to authorize “ a level of spending below last year ’ s authorized level.
” In a letter to committee chair Adam Smith and ranking member Mac Thornberry , Pocan and Lee are joined by 27 other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been made before , but it takes on new meaning when Congress is wrestling with questions of how much can and should be spent to address an overwhelming public health crisis , mass unemployment , and the perilous circumstance of state and local governments that have already spent down their budgets in the fight to prevent the spread of the deadly virus .
“ The COVID pandemic has laid bare how America has failed to make its budgets reflect the real needs of our everyday families , ” Lee says .
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we address our bloated military budget and re-target resources towards policies and programs that matter the most for keeping us safe , healthy , and secure.
” This is one reason a broad coalition of groups—some of them longtime critics of excessive military spending , others more broadly focused on budget priorities and public policy—have endorsed the call .
The backers include Public Citizen , Indivisible , the Council for a Livable World , Demand Progress , Physicians for Social Responsibility , Just Foreign Policy , Women ’ s Action for New Directions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies .
Also on board are the American Friends Service Committee , the Friends Committee on National Legislation , Pax Christi USA , the United Church of Christ , Justice and Witness Ministries , Global Ministries of the Christian Church ( Disciples of Christ ) , and the United Church of Christ .
Groups such as Peace Action , Codepink , Beyond the Bomb , Win Without War , and Washington Against Nuclear Weapons Coalition are talking up the proposal .
Hailing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy and political affairs Paul Kawika Martin declared that “ Congress must invest in other tools besides the bloated Pentagon to cure # COVID19 and spur economic recovery.
” Massive amounts of money are being allocated now , with scant oversight .
Already , the most cynical of the right-wing budget hawks are claiming that too much is being spent , and their objections will grow louder as the 2020 election approaches .
The letter spearheaded by Lee and Pocan pushes back with an argument that with the right priorities , the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenges it faces .
“ America needs a coronavirus cure , not more war .
We need more testing , not more bombs , ” the House members argue .
“ In order to reopen our nation in a data-driven , safe manner , we need to focus our spending efforts on the millions of additional coronavirus tests and tens of thousands of additional contract tracers we will need , as well as covering treatment costs , developing therapeutics , and distributing future vaccines.
” There ’ s nothing radical about that assessment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a Republican president , Dwight Eisenhower , in 1953 : Every gun that is made , every warship launched , every rocket fired signifies , in the final sense , a theft from those who hunger and are not fed , those who are cold and are not clothed .
This world in arms is not spending money alone .
It is spending the sweat of its laborers , the genius of its scientists , the hopes of its children .
The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this : a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cities .
It is two electric power plants , each serving a town of 60,000 population .
It is two fine , fully equipped hospitals .
It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement .
We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat .
We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people .
Eisenhower , who would eventually warn about the excesses of a profligate military-industrial complex , was a general who came to understand the cost of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need for a “ proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals , so that security and liberty may prosper together.
” Today , Pocan , Lee , and their colleagues speak a similar language , as they argue that in these “ unparalleled times , ” it is necessary to “ constrain defense spending during this pandemic so that we can defeat the greatest threat to our nation—the coronavirus .
”

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
The coronavirus pandemic and the economic meltdown extending from it are reframing our understanding of what endangers us. We now know that the greatest threat facing the United States is not some foreign adversary but a virus. Yet our budget priorities do not reflect this new reality.
House Progressive Caucus cochair Mark Pocan wants to correct that imbalance. “The enemy we’re fighting right now is COVID-19, so our sole focus should be on expanding testing, tracing and treatment, funding towards vaccine development, and relief for the American people,” Pocan says. “Increasing defense spending now would be a slap in the face to the families of over 90,000 Americans that have died from this virus.”
With Representative Barbara Lee, Pocan is leading a group of Democratic lawmakers in calling on the House Armed Services Committee members who will draft this year’s National Defense Authorization Act to authorize “a level of spending below last year’s authorized level.”
In a letter to committee chair Adam Smith and ranking member Mac Thornberry, Pocan and Lee are joined by 27 other House Democrats who argue,
That argument has been made before, but it takes on new meaning when Congress is wrestling with questions of how much can and should be spent to address an overwhelming public health crisis, mass unemployment, and the perilous circumstance of state and local governments that have already spent down their budgets in the fight to prevent the spread of the deadly virus.
“The COVID pandemic has laid bare how America has failed to make its budgets reflect the real needs of our everyday families,” Lee says. ”It’s long past time that we address our bloated military budget and re-target resources towards policies and programs that matter the most for keeping us safe, healthy, and secure.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
This is one reason a broad coalition of groups—some of them longtime critics of excessive military spending, others more broadly focused on budget priorities and public policy—have endorsed the call. The backers include Public Citizen, Indivisible, the Council for a Livable World, Demand Progress, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Just Foreign Policy, Women’s Action for New Directions, the Center for International Policy, and the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. Also on board are the American Friends Service Committee, the Friends Committee on National Legislation, Pax Christi USA, the United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries, Global Ministries of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), and the United Church of Christ. Groups such as Peace Action, Code Pink, Beyond the Bomb, Win Without War, and Washington Against Nuclear Weapons Coalition are talking up the proposal. Hailing the letter, Peace Action senior director for policy and political affairs Paul Kawika Martin declared that “Congress must invest in other tools besides the bloated Pentagon to cure #COVID19 and spur economic recovery.”
Massive amounts of money are being allocated now, with scant oversight. Already, the most cynical of the right-wing budget hawks are claiming that too much is being spent, and their objections will grow louder as the 2020 election approaches. The letter spearheaded by Lee and Pocan pushes back with an argument that with the right priorities, the United States has the resources to address the challenges it faces.
“America needs a coronavirus cure, not more war. We need more testing, not more bombs,” the House members argue. “In order to reopen our nation in a data-driven, safe manner, we need to focus our spending efforts on the millions of additional coronavirus tests and tens of thousands of additional contract tracers we will need, as well as covering treatment costs, developing therapeutics, and distributing future vaccines.”
There’s nothing radical about that assessment. Indeed, it echoes the words of a Republican president, Dwight Eisenhower, in 1953:
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.
Eisenhower, who would eventually warn about the excesses of a profligate military-industrial complex, was a general who came to understand the cost of warped priorities. He preached about the need for a “proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Today, Pocan, Lee, and their colleagues speak a similar language, as they argue that in these “unparalleled times,” it is necessary to “constrain defense spending during this pandemic so that we can defeat the greatest threat to our nation—the coronavirus.”


thenation--2020-05-21--How the Covid-19 Lockdown Is Reshaping Uighur Activism

For Uighur activists , the coronavirus outbreak could not have come at a worse time .
The Chinese government ’ s regime of oppression and mass internment in the country ’ s western Xinjiang province , under which upward of 1 million Uighurs and other Muslim minorities are subject to arbitrary detention in camps , began in April 2017 .
For two and half years , Uighurs outside of China—in large diasporas in the United States , Europe , and elsewhere—fought tooth and nail for the world to take notice .
But for too long , they say , press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action from foreign governments was all but absent .
At the beginning of this year , however , there was some cause for optimism .
Leaks detailing the full extent of the government ’ s brutality in Xinjiang , reported by The New York Times and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists last November , had made a splash .
At the end of 2019 , after many months of delay , the US House of Representatives passed the Uighur Human Rights Policy Act , designed to punish China for its actions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up in the first months of 2020 and passed by the Senate with a veto-proof majority .
At last , the plight of Uighurs in Xinjiang seemed on the cusp of breaking through to the mainstream .
Then , as it has so many things , Covid-19 obliterated that momentum .
“ We ’ ve worked really hard to make the world believe there is a massive human rights violation going on , ” Kuzzat Altay , president of the Uighur American Association , said .
“ Now , nobody ’ s talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events that were planned to seize on what seemed like Uighurs ’ moment—Chinese embassy protests , advocacy training , and Uighur cultural celebrations—were canceled .
Some will be rescheduled .
Uighurs worry , however , that even when normalcy resumes , it could be months or longer before they regain any traction .
Meanwhile , news from Xinjiang remains bleak .
But not everyone in the diaspora is lamenting the bad-situation-made-worse .
In quarantine , activists have adapted quickly to new constraints , and many say they are finding new ways to reach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efforts .
In March , as the United States finally began to respond to the virus , Uighur leaders representing 35 advocacy groups in 18 countries met via Jitsi , a secure Zoom alternative , to discuss how they might regroup .
The pandemic was well past the point of being a “ China story , ” but there were aspects of the Communist Party ’ s handling of the outbreak—the suppression of journalists and whistle-blowers , an active disinformation campaign—that have long marked the situation in Xinjiang .
Perhaps there was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangers , Dolkun Isa , president of the Munich-based World Uighur Congress , said .
The leaders determined to redouble their efforts , starting with social media .
Since the call , Uighur groups have been churning out more video testimonies than ever , in which members of the diaspora tell stories of friends and family members who have gone missing or suffered in Xinjiang .
They post the videos on Twitter , YouTube , TikTok , and elsewhere , hoping to catch the eyes of everyone around the world who has little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screens .
It can be a challenge to break through still , but the videos are getting more views than was typical before the pandemic , Isa said .
Interactions with posts on social media are up , and supportive private messages are flowing in .
Of course , Uighurs in the diaspora also have more time at home on their hands .
And so , activists are recruiting .
They ’ re conducting advocacy training on Zoom , sponsoring “ Twitterstorms ” and hashtag parties , and enlisting support for letter-writing campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In April , 38 Uighur groups sent a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee urging movement on the Uighur Act , the largest such campaign since the crisis in Xinjiang began .
In mid-May , the Senate finally passed the bipartisan bill , sending it back to the House .
( Human rights advocates have warned that meaningful enforcement still depends on the president , who has broadly avoided addressing China ’ s human rights abuses . )
Isa believes the advocacy push helped expedite the bill ’ s approval .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news aggregation service focused on Uighur issues based in Washington , D.C. , the lockdown has meant more bandwidth for his team to write and publish articles .
With new volunteers , Imin has also expanded his news service—which has worked for the past two years in English , Uighur , and Chinese , among other languages—into German , French , and Urdu .
He called the net effect of quarantine a “ level up for the Uighur cause.
” Indeed , reaching new audiences is an essential part of Uighur advocacy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the wayside in busier times , Rushan Abbas , founder of the Campaign for Uighurs , said .
In recent years , Abbas has toured US universities and other institutions giving speeches to raise awareness of Uighurs ’ treatment in Xinjiang , but her work was almost exclusively in English .
Now , in the past month , her team has translated speeches , press releases , and op-eds into Chinese , Turkish , and Arabic ; Abbas said reaching the Muslim world is especially important , as the acquiescence of governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has allowed China ’ s actions in Xinjiang to continue unchecked .
“ I should not say we thank the pandemic , ” Abbas said .
“ But we are using this terrible situation as an opportunity.
” Many in the Uighur diaspora live in exile from China because they escaped the country or were abroad when the Xinjiang crackdown began and did not dare return .
Cut off from loved ones back home , work and fellowship with other Uighurs are often the only things to help those in exile cope with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Social distancing has left many feeling doubly alone .
Those Shoes Were Made by a Uighur Detainee Making matters worse , scant knowledge of how the coronavirus spread in Xinjiang , and who was affected , have added to the already intolerable anxiety of the diaspora .
Amid a dearth of information from the province , Uighurs worry about what the Communist Party might get away with while the world ’ s attention is turned away .
“ Maybe an entire concentration camp is going to disappear , ” Altay , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Who ’ s going to care ?
Who ’ s going to hold China accountable ?
” To manage the added stress brought on by Covid-19 , more in the diaspora are turning to activism , Abbas said .
“ This is giving comfort to Uighurs , because they feel like they are doing something , ” she explained .
“ Instead of being lonely and homesick , they ’ re being a voice for their people.
” This has been the case for Jevlan Shirmemmet .
A young professional in Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had sent his parents and brother to internment camps in Xinjiang .
For two years , Shirmemmet said , he hadn ’ t spoken with his family , because international contact is frequently cause enough for Uighurs to be detained .
He avoided advocacy , also , for fear of retribution against friends and family .
But learning his family had been detained anyway—in his mother ’ s case , he believes it was simply because she visited him once when he was a university student in Istanbul—Shirmemmet , with encouragement from Abbas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his story .
Within a week , young Uighurs in Turkey and other countries reached out to Shirmemmet to share that their families , too , were detained .
They thought that their collective voice might have a greater impact than that of individual testimonies .
From quarantine , about a dozen young Uighurs now work together to create a series of videos about the Xinjiang crisis , how it is affecting specific groups of Uighurs , such as mothers , and other topics in the news that they then link to Xinjiang @ @ @ @ @ @ @ topics for the videos .
Later , some write the content and record the videos , while others translate the videos into a variety of languages .
The group aims for relevance and immediacy .
After the World Health Organization advised people to wash their hands , the group produced a video in which Shirmemmet discussed the importance of handwashing—and then bridged to the fact that many Uighurs in Xinjiang lack clean water , especially in the detention centers , where hygiene conditions are notoriously grim .
Many videos have gotten tens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , than the typical individual testimonies he ’ s seen .
Shirmemmet now regrets that he did not speak out sooner .
He vows that even after the coronavirus lockdown is lifted—and it ’ s been strict in Turkey—he will continue his activism .
“ I feel I can do something for my nation and my family , ” he said .
The situation in Xinjiang often seems like it might never improve , he said , but the new camaraderie Shirmemmet has found online is reason to take heart .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
“ But we can do something together .
That is hope .
”

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
For Uighur activists, the coronavirus outbreak could not have come at a worse time.
The Chinese government’s regime of oppression and mass internment in the country’s western Xinjiang province, under which upward of 1 million Uighurs and other Muslim minorities are subject to arbitrary detention in camps, began in April 2017. For two and half years, Uighurs outside of China—in large diasporas in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere—fought tooth and nail for the world to take notice. But for too long, they say, press coverage came in a trickle, and action from foreign governments was all but absent.
At the beginning of this year, however, there was some cause for optimism. Leaks detailing the full extent of the government’s brutality in Xinjiang, reported by The New York Times and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists last November, had made a splash. At the end of 2019, after many months of delay, the US House of Representatives passed the Uighur Human Rights Policy Act, designed to punish China for its actions, which activists had hoped would be taken up in the first months of 2020 and passed by the Senate with a veto-proof majority.
At last, the plight of Uighurs in Xinjiang seemed on the cusp of breaking through to the mainstream.
Then, as it has so many things, Covid-19 obliterated that momentum. “We’ve worked really hard to make the world believe there is a massive human rights violation going on,” Kuzzat Altay, president of the Uighur American Association, said. “Now, nobody’s talking about Uighurs.” Around the world, events that were planned to seize on what seemed like Uighurs’ moment—Chinese embassy protests, advocacy training, and Uighur cultural celebrations—were canceled. Some will be rescheduled. Uighurs worry, however, that even when normalcy resumes, it could be months or longer before they regain any traction. Meanwhile, news from Xinjiang remains bleak. Refugee One Uighur Man’s Circuitous Journey to Safety Andrew McCormick
But not everyone in the diaspora is lamenting the bad-situation-made-worse. In quarantine, activists have adapted quickly to new constraints, and many say they are finding new ways to reach people and expand the scope of their efforts.
In March, as the United States finally began to respond to the virus, Uighur leaders representing 35 advocacy groups in 18 countries met via Jitsi, a secure Zoom alternative, to discuss how they might regroup. The pandemic was well past the point of being a “China story,” but there were aspects of the Communist Party’s handling of the outbreak—the suppression of journalists and whistle-blowers, an active disinformation campaign—that have long marked the situation in Xinjiang. Perhaps there was a chance to highlight China’s authoritarian dangers, Dolkun Isa, president of the Munich-based World Uighur Congress, said. The leaders determined to redouble their efforts, starting with social media. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
Since the call, Uighur groups have been churning out more video testimonies than ever, in which members of the diaspora tell stories of friends and family members who have gone missing or suffered in Xinjiang. They post the videos on Twitter, YouTube, TikTok, and elsewhere, hoping to catch the eyes of everyone around the world who has little place to go right now but their screens. It can be a challenge to break through still, but the videos are getting more views than was typical before the pandemic, Isa said. Interactions with posts on social media are up, and supportive private messages are flowing in.
Of course, Uighurs in the diaspora also have more time at home on their hands. And so, activists are recruiting. They’re conducting advocacy training on Zoom, sponsoring “Twitterstorms” and hashtag parties, and enlisting support for letter-writing campaigns to prominent politicians around the world. In April, 38 Uighur groups sent a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee urging movement on the Uighur Act, the largest such campaign since the crisis in Xinjiang began.
In mid-May, the Senate finally passed the bipartisan bill, sending it back to the House. (Human rights advocates have warned that meaningful enforcement still depends on the president, who has broadly avoided addressing China’s human rights abuses.) Isa believes the advocacy push helped expedite the bill’s approval.
For Tahir Imin, who runs an all-volunteer news aggregation service focused on Uighur issues based in Washington, D.C., the lockdown has meant more bandwidth for his team to write and publish articles. With new volunteers, Imin has also expanded his news service—which has worked for the past two years in English, Uighur, and Chinese, among other languages—into German, French, and Urdu. He called the net effect of quarantine a “level up for the Uighur cause.”
Indeed, reaching new audiences is an essential part of Uighur advocacy, but translation and targeted outreach often fell by the wayside in busier times, Rushan Abbas, founder of the Campaign for Uighurs, said. In recent years, Abbas has toured US universities and other institutions giving speeches to raise awareness of Uighurs’ treatment in Xinjiang, but her work was almost exclusively in English. Now, in the past month, her team has translated speeches, press releases, and op-eds into Chinese, Turkish, and Arabic; Abbas said reaching the Muslim world is especially important, as the acquiescence of governments in Muslim-majority countries is in part what has allowed China’s actions in Xinjiang to continue unchecked. “I should not say we thank the pandemic,” Abbas said. “But we are using this terrible situation as an opportunity.”
Many in the Uighur diaspora live in exile from China because they escaped the country or were abroad when the Xinjiang crackdown began and did not dare return. Cut off from loved ones back home, work and fellowship with other Uighurs are often the only things to help those in exile cope with the pain—and often the powerlessness—of that separation. Social distancing has left many feeling doubly alone. Forced Labor Those Shoes Were Made by a Uighur Detainee Jasmin Malik Chua
Making matters worse, scant knowledge of how the coronavirus spread in Xinjiang, and who was affected, have added to the already intolerable anxiety of the diaspora. Amid a dearth of information from the province, Uighurs worry about what the Communist Party might get away with while the world’s attention is turned away. “Maybe an entire concentration camp is going to disappear,” Altay, of the Uighur American Association, said. “Who’s going to care? Who’s going to hold China accountable?”
To manage the added stress brought on by Covid-19, more in the diaspora are turning to activism, Abbas said. “This is giving comfort to Uighurs, because they feel like they are doing something,” she explained. “Instead of being lonely and homesick, they’re being a voice for their people.” Current Issue View our current issue
This has been the case for Jevlan Shirmemmet. A young professional in Turkey, Shirmemmet discovered recently that Chinese authorities had sent his parents and brother to internment camps in Xinjiang. For two years, Shirmemmet said, he hadn’t spoken with his family, because international contact is frequently cause enough for Uighurs to be detained. He avoided advocacy, also, for fear of retribution against friends and family. But learning his family had been detained anyway—in his mother’s case, he believes it was simply because she visited him once when he was a university student in Istanbul—Shirmemmet, with encouragement from Abbas, took to social media to tell his story.
Within a week, young Uighurs in Turkey and other countries reached out to Shirmemmet to share that their families, too, were detained. They thought that their collective voice might have a greater impact than that of individual testimonies. From quarantine, about a dozen young Uighurs now work together to create a series of videos about the Xinjiang crisis, how it is affecting specific groups of Uighurs, such as mothers, and other topics in the news that they then link to Xinjiang. In conference calls, they select topics for the videos. Later, some write the content and record the videos, while others translate the videos into a variety of languages.
The group aims for relevance and immediacy. After the World Health Organization advised people to wash their hands, the group produced a video in which Shirmemmet discussed the importance of handwashing—and then bridged to the fact that many Uighurs in Xinjiang lack clean water, especially in the detention centers, where hygiene conditions are notoriously grim. Many videos have gotten tens of thousands of views—far more, Shirmemmet said, than the typical individual testimonies he’s seen.
Shirmemmet now regrets that he did not speak out sooner. He vows that even after the coronavirus lockdown is lifted—and it’s been strict in Turkey—he will continue his activism. “I feel I can do something for my nation and my family,” he said. The situation in Xinjiang often seems like it might never improve, he said, but the new camaraderie Shirmemmet has found online is reason to take heart. “We are in a difficult position,” he said. “But we can do something together. That is hope.”