If we are to withstand the coming totalitarian regime, we will need resources that are not just political but beautiful. We must become reattuned to our past and look to a standard outside ourselves. Reclaiming beauty means acknowledging that there are good things that have come before us.
When the stock market becomes volatile, people begin to invest in gold and other stable options. Likewise, when the culture is tempted by totalitarianism, it’s time to invest in beautiful things—things like art, music, literature, and tradition. These need to be collected—not streamed. They must be tangible and, if possible, something we can participate in.
Totalitarianism seeks to capture the total populace by way of conquering the total person. By total person I mean everything that makes a person a person: laughing, fighting, singing, marrying, parenting, solving, creating, and worshiping. Totalitarianism conquers a person by limiting his experience of the world and thereby leading him to sneer, backstab, chant, divorce, propagandize, destroy, and mock.
The key method of totalitarianism in its conquest of people is conformity through centralization. It does this in several ways, but generally it does so by narrowing in on one idea such as the means of production or racism or eugenics, and extending that one idea into every area of life. Every act becomes, for example, an act of racism: adopting a black child, owning property, or even learning arithmetic. Or every act is a political act signifying the never-ending struggle between the oppressors and the oppressed. This includes anything from buying China-made products from Wal-Mart to writing a novel to traveling for vacation.
Totalitarianism, like cancer, which is the uncontrolled growth of cells in one area of the body, is simple and total. Once the idea reaches the top of major institutions, it becomes only a matter of time before everything that does not fit into the narrative is either censored or destroyed. As I said in the beginning of this essay, we are being tempted by different totalitarianisms on every side, and it won’t be long before one of them is king of the hill. In totalitarian regimes there is no art for art’s sake, only propaganda for the regime’s sake.
The response to COVID-19 has given way to increased centralization in two areas. First, in the government through unprecedented economic relief packages and one-party control of the three branches; second, in major corporations that remained open during the lockdowns as small businesses permanently closed down. Though power is being centralized in these two groups, it is unclear whether they oppose one another or are working toward the same cause. It is undeniable, however, that technologies such as social media and Big Data will be used to push whatever ideology (perhaps closely related ideologies) onto the public. In either case, a radical shifting of values and way of life is in process this very moment.
The key feature of any totalitarian regime is drab sameness—a relentless, monotone orthodoxy that is parroted by its subjects. Therefore, the best defense against such a regime is to recover the arts and widen our experience of the world. Again, these must be things we can find, restore, and create. While our society might boast of a limitless variety of music, T.V. shows, art galleries, and educational programs, all accessible through our fingertips, this variety is nullified by the limited means of access. These varieties of genres and mediums are now largely accessed by digital streaming, making the encounter of beauty one-dimensional. It is like only going out to eat and never having a homemade meal, or never cooking a meal for someone else. People cannot just feast on finished products; they must create products and live through processes. Otherwise, we limit our experience and will be unable to argue against what George Orwell called “NewSpeak” in his novel 1984. Remember? WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. Orwell said the goal is not to get people to believe in these contradictions, but to limit people’s experience so much that they will not be able to tell the difference between opposite ideas.
The problem of finding beautiful art is twofold. The first problem is the means of searching. If we seek out beautiful things but our experience of them is funneled through one medium (the computer or smartphone), then we are entering a race with only one leg. The second problem is judging between good art and bad art. Of all the books in the world, which are worth reading? Of all the songs that have been sung, which are worth learning? Personal taste might be the first measure but is by no means the final. There are other criteria for judging art such as technical excellence, truthfulness, respect for the discipline’s traditions, and the artist’s integrity.
There are some art forms where the goal is simple and therefore provides its own criteria for judgement. For example, the goal of comedy is to make an audience laugh. If a comedian can accomplish this goal with regularity, then we can conclude, at the very least, that his jokes are funny. An element of bad art, which can be seen in so many genres today from music to the fine art in museums, is pure self-expression. I meet this most frequently when teaching English. The most common complaint professors at universities have is that students cannot write. They cannot write because they do not write to express ideas but to express themselves. They describe without defining; they shape without form. Pure self-expression is bankrupt when it is not grounded in a form that imitates nature. An artist must not simply paint himself onto the canvas, but capture something outside himself, something of the world or of humanity, and raise it to new life for his viewers.
Given the oppression of totalitarianism and the problems of finding good art, it is more important than ever to reclaim beautiful things. Attending traditional worship services is a good place to start. I prefer a Protestant church where the Bible is preached as God’s inerrant word, the congregants are serious about taking their faith out into the world, and church discipline is practiced. But my preference is beside the point. We must become reattuned to our past. People have a need for community that not only exists in the present, but is connected with the past—in other words, with something that is generational in scope. Therefore, dust off your parents’ old hymnals, look at the sheet music, and sing. Sit down during the moments of silence and examine your heart according to the law of God and let your conscience search you. For the first step in the search for beauty is to look to a standard outside yourself. Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, for there are beautiful things that our eyes are unworthy to behold. Our eyes must be trained to see beautiful things. Reclaiming beauty means acknowledging that there are good things that have come before us.
Now is the time to find beautiful things and preserve them. C.S. Lewis once said that art has no survival value, but rather gives value to surviving. If we are to withstand the coming totalitarian regime, we will need resources that are not just political but beautiful.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image is “A Music Party” (1864) by Arthur Hughes (1832–1915) and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
You conclude, “Now is the time to find beautiful things and preserve them.”
Yes, indeed.
Awesome!
Great art raises the human spirit. You, sir, with this essay, have raised our spirits. You’ve presented an absolutely outside-the-box approach that had not dawned on me until now.
Going outside ourselves for a higher standard is partially correct. While we can take in those “higher things” from outside us, it is deep within our souls where that peace truly connects to what is permanent. (And tyranny can never rob us of that. Your approach is a clear path to discovering such permanent things.)
Well stated, and worth contemplating more.
CT, Thank you for your kind comment. I’m happy I acquainted you with this approach; however, it is not original to me. You might enjoy reading John-Mark L. Miravalle’s “Beauty: What it is and Why it Matters” or watching Roger Scruton’s “Why Beauty Matters” if you liked this essay.
I think connecting “higher things” to our souls is what produces peace.
May I suggest you would like the late Stratford Caldecott’s book Beauty In the World, Rethinking the Foundations of Education. He left our world way too soon. But San Francisco Archbishop Cordelione is helping with his BenedictXVI Institute. As are others who recognize what we have lost in giving up our Catholic and classical traditions.
But HOW can we find and preserve them? We need to support their creation, first by supporting the education of gifted upcoming artists committed to beauty, who will bring back traditional techniques not being taught in most schools. This can be in the form of scholarship funds or institutional support of the few schools who are teaching those techniques, and designate our gifts to be used that way. We need to identify and personally support the few mature artists who are already creating beauty. If you give money to most grant organizations, be assured, it will be squandered on those who are not creating traditional beauty but the grotesque. What do artists need? They need a livelihood, and they need money to display their work, whether in a show or (for classical music) in the funding to make recordings of their work, especially. At the very least, we can all afford to buy a copy of their music albums or paintings or prints.
I like how practical your first question is–“But HOW do we find and preserve beautiful things?” As far as methods for finding them, I suggest they can be found in haunting libraries, art museums, going for walks, conversing with friends and mentors and listening to live music. Supporting the creation of beautiful things, as you suggest, is certainly a part of preservation. For we do not “create” anything in the strict sense. We fashion and build off of what has come before. If we build on top of things that are beautiful, then the beauty that is found in them will have been preserved. Finding comes before preserving.
You’re also right that we should be conscious of supporting artists who are creating beauty. I’m pleased to see you are such a one with your musical compositions.
And don’t forget to support your local Latin Mass Society and schola.
Our civilisation seems to have passed through the inspiration of religion, through the usefulness of the Enlightenment, through the practicality of science / technology, and beyond the genius of the arts to arrive at a plateau of ennui from which we passively observe the current invasion of the West, in combination with a quisling sabotage of our heritage of ideals by those within, who have been inculcated into a reflex of self loathing.
A change of mindset that could avert complete eclipse of our Culture requires the realisation that tradition is not preservation of the ashes but rather passing on the flame
Scrumptious essay! I especially like how you stress that listening to/looking at art is not enough. We must ourselves create in some way. To look at art and to create art are two completely different things. I was also sobered by your point about writing to express ideas rather than to express oneself. It is a very thought-provoking reminder.
Thank you for writing this incredibly insightful essay! It is absolutely spot on! Your analysis of totalitarianism and its effects on culture, people, and the arts is excellently crafted and gives us much to ponder and to reflect upon. It is so important that we discern the “what” and “why” of what is happening in our culture before we can even begin to start working on the “how” of addressing it. There needs to be a returning to the fountain of beauty – AKA that fountain of living waters, whose waters do not fail!
Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” John 4:13-14
Profound article, worth pondering for some time to come. The need to produce, and the necessity of a standard outside of oneself are foundational, and not just in the realm of beauty, but all of life. Thank you.
What a great essay! So many of your points resonated with me. For example, the dusting off hymnbooks (I wish our church would do this) and the fallacy of pure self-expression in music and writing (John Cage, anyone?). Anytime anyone writes about the search for beauty and its importance, my ears prick up. Thank you for your efforts in writing this essay. I am on my own journey, even as a woman of a certain age, to give myself the liberal arts education I never got in college by reading the great books of Western Civilization. I’m also an unemployed professional flutist, but still pursue beauty through my music making, reveling in the great composers (Bach, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Schubert, etc.), if only in my own music room. My audience is our Lord and I know He is pleased.
An excellent and thought-provoking essay. This line especially grabbed me and will stay with me for a while: “In totalitarian regimes there is no art for art’s sake, only propaganda for the regime’s sake.” Whether we are headed inevitably toward totalitarianism seems fairly debatable to me, but it seems to me impossible to deny that we living in a time of intellectual and artistic terrorism that is not only bullying “heretical” art off the public stage but is killing it before it is born, as writers are forced to self-censor to avoid the wrath of the cancel-culture mob.
Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about neo-classicism; specifically the belief that art should not be merely technically well-done and pleasing to view, but that it should also be ennobling–that is, good art should help cultivate virtue.
Thank you for this.
Beautiful essay! It is encouraging to know there are things we can do now to push back against the zeitgeist, with God’s grace. I’m thankful for our little Protestant church which has not abandoned the ancient paths. Whenever I sing the hymns (eg “O Love, How Deep, How Broad, How High”, written in the 15th century), I imagine all the saints who’ve sung those same hymns down through the ages. It is humbling and inspiring at the same time!
“The problem of finding beautiful art is twofold. [ ] The second problem is judging between good art and bad art. Of all the books in the world, which are worth reading? Of all the songs that have been sung, which are worth learning? Personal taste might be the first measure but is by no means the final. There are other criteria for judging art such as technical excellence, truthfulness, respect for the discipline’s traditions, and the artist’s integrity.”
Most to the Left are more concerned about how well the Art represents under-represented voices than about technical excellence, truthfulness, and respect for tradition; all of which for Woke critics are repugnant criteria. Taste in Art is not based on the pleasure it gives us but on its allegiance to a canon. If we do not believe in the canon we have bad taste or are sinners. We are shunned, excommunicated, or cancelled. We are politically incorrect, perhaps, phobic in need of re-education. Art and Beauty are judged by how well the artist represents his/her group. That’s aesthetic criticism in the postmodern age (Hutcheon). Its lineage goes back to the self-centrism of the sixties. The Woke may think that they have cast off the models of Western thinking but they haven’t. The Woke have finally given Sartre the morality he was unable to provide his philosophy. I’m OK, you’re OK has become I’m OK, You’re not OK. I’ll choose and I’ll choose for you too. This interpretation of history may be the reason why influential social critics see nothing but authoritarianism in our future. It’s safer than anarchy…maybe.
Thanks very much for this beautiful article. It has helped me a lot & it has given me strength to go ahead and support my deep Christian values which today are usually mocked by modernists. I truly appreciate your exposition and how you have given me courage to go on preserving my valuable education and religious faith. God bless you. Kindly regards. Beatrix Weidmann