02-22-2019, 05:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-22-2019, 05:39 PM by Eric the Green.)
(02-21-2019, 02:30 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Economic achievement usually leads to cultural achievement. A society capable of creating an economic surplus is able at the least to ornament what would otherwise be stark emptiness of the now-defunct Berlin Wall.
People will want to be entertained and inspired.
A prosperous society can see cultural ferment, as opposed to one left in a semi-barbaric condition, but by today's standards, past societies that produced great art had nowhere near the material prosperity levels that we have, who don't.
Partly it's because modern societies are just different. Traditional societies had rich elites and poor masses, but the elites were cultured and they sponsored great art. There was also much greatness in the folk arts too. In India, a relatively poor society, the place is loaded with cultural riches everywhere you look that are not just the product of elites. Latin American folk are is also rich and high quality.
Our society has liberated the common man to a greater degree, although this has been backtracking in the neo-liberal era. But this new empowering of neo-liberal elites in a new unequal society does not lead to an aristocratic culture that sponsors great arts. Today's elites are as deaf and dumb culturally as the masses they rule over. And the masses and elites alike are programmed only to see material goals.
And our veneration of technology impresses us too much, and therefore robs us of culture as well. Tech acts as a substitute culture, and its physical accomplishments get all the prestige and the rewards, while the arts are looked down upon and left in poverty, although the elites do drive up art prices at auctions.