Category:Blog

Benign Malevolence 2025 (NSFW)

Posted on by Jaustin

The 1 Year Anniversary of BM’s launch.

Allow Me To Reintroduce Myself

A Year ago today I went live with BM by posting “My Transition into a Cyborg” and “Benign Malevolence 2024”. It’s safe to say I jumped the gun a bit. 

I haven’t been active on BM socials because I realized there was a lot more to be done behind the scenes. Let me give you some context.

In May 2024 I wrote “Starry Night(s): “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.”, which got me freaking banned from Substack (my old blog host). Apparently I used the word Nazi too many times (cowards). After editing the blog they unbanned me, but the damage was done. SubStack silenced me. They castrated me like an innocent Unsullied child soldier. 

All I was doing was providing SubStack the content they so desperately crave AND THIS IS HOW THEY REPAY ME? SubStack’s hypocrisy is truly stunning, banning someone for calling out fascism is a little on the nose, wouldn’t you agree? Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black if you ask me. Anyways, those little content junkies couldn’t handle the truth and now they must live with the consequences. It may take years, decades even. But SubStack will reap what it sowed, BM will make sure of it. 

As Jay-z would say, this is a public service announcement.

FELLOW ARTISTS, BLOGGERS, CREATORS. CALL YOUR BANNERS, RAISE YOUR ARMS, WE ARE GOING TO WAR AGAINST THE WICKED OPPRESSION THAT GOES BY SUBSTACK. THE VILE SCUM THAT MINES YOUR DATA UNDER THE ILLUSION OF FREE SPEECH WILL BE BROUGHT TO IT’S KNEES. (it sounds cooler if you read it with a JFK impression).

What I’ve Been Up To

Enough with the threats. All jokes aside, it was a blessing in disguise. In May 2024 I also graduated from University. My freelance stuff was going well but I had extra time on my hands and the way my brain works if I’m not actively learning something I sorta just melt into a pit of despair. 

I thought about learning how to brew non premade coffee. I thought about learning how to become a professional Crusader Kings 3 player. I even thought about reading the Bible for the first time. But none of those tickled the itch. 

After getting banned from SubStack I needed to rebuild BM’s business plan. I didn’t want to run the risk of getting banned from another server due to my precarious prose. So I choose to build my own blog server. One entirely developed by and through BM — BRICK BY BRICK. 

Integrating a blog into the site the way I envisioned was a lot more challenging than I initially thought. In order to do this I needed to get nasty at coding. So that’s what I did. I clenched my teeth and dove headfirst into the trenches (Javascript) and came out a different man. I felt like Christopher Walken in Deer Hunter the way I was losing grip on reality.  

But now I’ve got the juice. I am an absolute unit when it comes to Java. I went from averaging page scores of 30-40% to 90% consistently! My newfound arch nemesis SubStack can only reach 41%. Losers!

That’s right, ain’t nobody can tell me shit. I hope you’re reading this Mr. Botzo. My grade 7 teacher never would’ve seen this coming. I would like to thank a few people for this momentous stride I took in the past year. 

Anthropic; the people who made Claude. I’ve learned more about Java using the A.I. Claude to teach me, then I have in 8+ years trying to learn through YouTube.

David Goggins – I read his book last year and honestly I don’t agree with a lot of it, but he did inspire me to love the grind. It’s kinda funny his grind is 20x marathons and mine is starring at a computer for 20 hours straight. But hey, a grind is a grind, baby.

My parents – my Dad has been adamant I learn how to code and take advantage of these tech advancements before I’m too far behind

The Raiders  – Mark Davis selling part of the team to Tom Brady has renewed my lease on life. I feel like I’ve just crawled out of Plato’s cave and am seeing colors for the first time.

God. Family. Football. You can be the one to choose whether Claude or Goggins is God in this scenario. 

For real, coding is so fun. The webpages I’m making are pure art and nobody can tell me otherwise. It puts me in a flow state I haven’t felt since I worked on my first exhibition Human Error. 

It’s very serendipitous a year ago I wrote “My Transition into a Cyborg” asking you all what it means to be an artist in the 21st century, and now I’m proclaiming my code is as artistic as anything these days, like I’m Marcel Duchamp posted up with my urinal. 

OG Bubby Jaustin reflecting on the rhapsodic interplay of form and void, where chromatic luxuriance meets the whisper of negative space, within his JavaScript code. The artist’s gestural bravura imbues the composition with a kinetic vitality, oscillating between chaos and meticulous intentionality. One senses an almost synesthetic dialogue between code and brain, as though the lines themselves are imbued with a sentient longing. It is not merely code, but an invocation—an ephemeral mirage of emotion, suspended in the liminality between abstraction and revelation.

– OG Bubby Jaustin

Didn’t that philosopher Heraclitus once say “Character is Destiny”? I’m thinking he was onto something. Anyways, enough of what I’ve been up to. Here’s what’s in store for BM. 

2025 Roadmap


The site is far from perfect. The first few months of the year, the majority of my BM work will be on the backend, trying to get everything up to par before I really go to town with content. 

Q1

– I expect to have the site fully coded how I envision sometime by March-April.

– Finalize the partnership with the Creative Commons

Q2 & Q3

CONTENT CONTENT CONTENT

– I don’t want to lock in a schedule yet, but I’m aiming to produce something like 1 blog a week and 1 video a month for BM

– During this time I’m going to be pursuing as many people as possible to join the BM community. Again, not something I’ve finalized but I’m planning on offering creatives either; ownership into BM varying on how much engagement they produce, or x% Profits from each piece of content they produce.

For example, companies like YouTube, Spotify, Apple music, etc., tend to pay creatives something like $1 for every 1000 streams, so BM will use a similar model.

– Hoping to secure a partnership with 2 specific Toronto-based media companies I’m a fan of (this is me speaking it into existence)

Q4

– MORE CONTENT

– By now, hopefully BM will have more than just me as a creator, therefore we should be posting more than 1 blog a week.

– The goal is to eventually have 1 piece of content a day. That’s probably ambitious for 2025, but hey, shooters shoot. 

– Over the past year I’ve been playing around with a new exhibition idea. No promises but maybe when I gear more into content mode I get to work on bringing that to fruition. (BTW if you still haven’t seen HYPERREAL, the archive is back online temporarily: https://benignmalevolence.com/2022/09/24/hyperreal/ )

What Else? 

 I don’t mean to pull your leg as it’s probably going to be at least a month before you hear from me again, but I figured since it’s the year anniversary of BM’s launch, you were long overdue for an update. 

In the meantime I’ll leave you with some of the art/books/content BM is looking at so you can get an idea of the aesthetics we are focusing on going into the year:

The Xenogenesis Series by Octavia E. Butler (1987)

This is a science fiction book about aliens saving humanity from a nuclear war and holy shit it’s one of the most uncomfortable things I’ve ever read. I just finished book 2 and need a breather before I go into 3. If the thought of Alien orgies are cool this is probably your thing. 


The Deer Hunter by Michael Cimino (1978)

The main consideration for me on whether or not a movie is good is if I think about it the day after. I watched The Deer Hunter a month ago and I’m still thinking about it. This movie fucked me up. I’ve watched all the main Vietnam war movies and this one is by far the most traumatizing of the bunch. It’s also the first time I’ve seen Christopher Walken not as an old man so that was cool.  Warning: shit is dark asf

Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (1953)

I had a blog of Fahrenheit 451 in my drafts last year but due to unforeseen circumstances (fuck you SubStack)  I had to can it. With all the election BS and the propaganda hitting our feeds I feel like this book is more important now than ever. 

K-Punk by Mark Fisher (2003-2015)

If K-Punk has 1 million fans, I am one of them. 
If K-Punk has one fan, then I AM THAT ONE. 
If K-Punk has zero fans, that means I am dead. 

Shout out and RIP Mark Fisher. K-Punk will always be in BM’s DNA. I will continue to make it one of my life’s missions to put as many people onto Mark Fisher as possible.

May 68’ (1968 lol)

I’ve been obsessed with watching documentaries and reading books about May 68’ lately because It seems so similar to what’s going on with the student protests of the Israel Palestine war. Maybe in a few weeks I’ll explain what I mean, but for now, I encourage you all to read up on the May 68 protests. History is repeating itself in front of our eyes. 


Constructivism (The art movement)

Constructivism is about jamming as much meaning to produce as provocative a reaction as possible using only the most simplistic and universal artistic elements.  “Constructivists believed that art had no place in the hermetic space of the artist’s studio. Rather, they thought that art should reflect the industrial world and that it should be used as a tool in the Communist revolution” (Constructivist handbook). BM doesn’t necessarily agree with the ends of the constructivist art movement, but it surely supports the means. I am constantly impressed by the constructivist ability to produce such poignant aesthetic truths in such mundane works of art.  My goal as an artist is very much aligned with the constructivist ideals. To better understand BM’s philosophy I recommend you read up on constructivism. 

Any and all Future Music

I was never a fan of Future growing up but in the past year something switched in my brain. Future was my second most played artist in 2024. Unfortunately I might be in my misogynistic era cause “I ain’t got no manners for sluts, Imma put my thumb in her butt!”. I’m just joking! Mom, aunts, uncles, I pray to god you didn’t read this far. I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself.

Now seems like a good time to end this. Thank you all sincerely for taking the time to read my work. I’m very excited about the work BM is planning to produce and I’m hoping I can pass some of that onto you! To whoever’s reading this, I hope you have had a great start to your year, and continue to push that momentum forward!

DULCE ET DECORUM EST PRO PATRIA MORI

“IT IS SWEET AND FITTING TO DIE FOR ONE’S CREATIVITY”

FUTUE TE IPSUM SUBSTACK

“FUCK YOU SUBSTACK”

EXTRA EXTRA – THE RAIDERS ARE BACK – READ ALL ABOUT IT

Posted on by Jaustin

13 Head Coaches in 22 years.


Since 2002, there have been 120 head coaching hires in the NFL


The Raiders have had 13 of them. 


That means the Raiders have accounted for over 10% of the NFL head coaching hires in the past 20 years despite being in a league with 31 other teams.


Holy fucking shit what have I done with my life.


The jokes write themselves. The Raiders have had more coaches than AB has brain cells. The Raiders have had more coaches than Jon Gruden has recorded slurs. The Raiders have had more coaches than Mark Davis has had pube grafting hair follicle surgery.



But the Dark times are finally over. For the first time in my entire fandom, I am seeing light at the end of the tunnel. For the first time since I donned the silver and black as a mere babe in the woods, I can look at that shield with a sense of pride, honor, and machismo.


First, it was Tom Brady.


Then it was Spytek.


Now it’s Pete.


What do those three gentlemen have in common? They’re winners. And they willingly decided to put on the silver and black. The same silver and black that has been the dumpster fire of the NFL for my whole existence. The same silver and black that drafted Jamarcus Russell over Megatron, Robert Gallery over Larry Fitz, and Fabian Washington over Aaron Rogers. IN THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS. There are so many more bad picks I’d rather not look back on. 


I’m getting carried away here, the point of this blog isn’t to look into the past. It’s to predict the future.


Done are the Raiders of the old. No longer are we the laughingstock of the NFL. A new era is upon us. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the raiders are coming to pillage your land and steal your treasure. If this was a different time, THE RAIDERS WOULD INVADE YOUR FAVELLA ON HORSEBACK… nvrm I’m getting carried away again. 



I mean seriously. The best games of my childhood was David versus Goliath, the Legion of Boom versus the GOAT. Now, the architect of the LOB and the GOAT himself are rocking the same shield I have so faithfully cherished through thick and thin. It’s like if Captain America and Thanos teamed up to take out the rest of The Avengers.


To anyone out there calling this Ben Johnson cope, I would like to present this piece of evidence: 


I take zero responsibility for saying “Meet Harbough in the Superbowl” I know Pete and that JABRONI are gonna meet twice a year. I made that after a long day of work and a CBG gummy.  I was watching too many Seattle San Fran highlights. I’m not sorry. 


But I will take all of the credit for willing Pete to Vegas into existence. Unfortunately, my quant guy is on vacation but I would only assume the Raiders never would’ve gone this direction we’re it not for my social media engineering.


I plan on writing more about the Raiders and sports this year to juice the portfolio a little bit. I’m working on figuring out a way to recode the email list so that subscribers can opt-in and out of specific categories. For example, if you want to read my art content but don’t care about my sports takes, you’ll be able to do that soon! That’s why I turned off emails for this blog. So stay tuned for that update.


Consider this sports fans. This is the last time to hop on the Raiders bandwagon. The pirate ship is sailing. Either pack your bags or go home. See you in Canton.

The Simple Beauty of the 2024 Puerto Vallarta Art Walk

Posted on by Jaustin

Puerto Vallarta’s greatest artists assemble for the 2024 Puerto Vallarta Art Walk


I just got back from a trip of a lifetime with some buddies in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. Between the bottomless strawberry margs and the grueling hikes our hemp-wrapped lungs could barely handle, we spent a lot of time exploring the beautiful city. 


Puerto Vallarta is beautiful for a lot of reasons. Surrounded by mountains and the Pacific Ocean, you can’t help but feel you’re isolated in this natural compound, hidden from the irrational Kafkaesque irregularities we all face daily. It’s also home to some of the most unique architecture I’ve ever seen, with aesthetic traditions like haciendas taking precedence over the mundane architectural efficiencies I’m used to in Toronto. On top of this, the friendliest people I’ve ever encountered all seem to reside in this peaceful city. Going into the trip, my naive self was weary of the violence and corruption the mainstream media likes to pile onto Mexico. However, the reality couldn’t be further from the truth.


That all said, the most beautiful aspect of Puerto Vallarta to me was its famous art scene. As I’ve since learned, the Puerto Vallarta Art Walk is an internationally renowned festival where artists around the world display their work. The following are some of my favorite paintings and sculptures we saw on this year’s art walk. All photos were taken on my iPhone 12 and touched up in Lightroom. Gallery links can be found below.


Figure 1, Gallery Colectika

One thing that particularly sticks out to me in many of the paintings featured on this year’s walk is the absence of political and other didactic themes. Here, artists seem far more focused on their art’s technical aesthetic and expressive aspects than their commentary.


In Puerta Vallarta, art simply exists to exist. It doesn’t serve some secondary purpose that mobilizes its audience. It merely serves as a mirror, reflecting the serene beauty of their environment.


Figure 3, Gallery Corsica
Figure 4, Gallery Corsica
Figure 5, Gallery Pajaro Rojo
Figure 6, Gallery Pajaro Rojo
Figure 7, Gallery Pajaro Rojo

This is coming from a country laden with violence and corruption, at least as seen through the eyes of the media. Generally speaking, today’s most famous works of art are used to weaponize revolutions and to mobilize the masses. This idea came before WW2 with thinkers like Leon Trotsky, who famously stayed in Mexico with artists Andre Breton, Frida Kahlo, & Diego Rivera after his exile from Russia.


Trotsky debated with the prominent Mexican artists about the nature of art. Trotsky, beyond being an acclaimed military strategist, was also an extremely versed critic, who saw art as a tool for revolutions and as a means to freedom. Kahlo on the other hand, agreed with this assessment but thought that it was impossible to separate the aesthetic from the political, making any attempts prone to contradiction, and the freedom it aspires to achieve a paradoxical trap.


The influence Frida Kahlo has on the Mexican art scene is palpable. Beyond the fact that you can’t walk five blocks without seeing her face on a mural of some sort, you can witness the way she approached art in every Mexican painting today. It isn’t that these artists are “scared” to be political. Rather, they understand political presence is inevitable. Instead of fighting it like swimming against a current upstream, they swim within it and let it take whatever shape it wants.


Figure 8, Browne Gallery


Figure 8 is one of the only overtly didactic pieces I noticed on this year’s walk. Besides, it isn’t making any political attack. It’s making the benign statement that money gets more attention than love. Hence, the line features Mr. Burns, Mr. Krab, Scrooge McDuck, etc. Something that seems very evident in Western culture today.


I believe the style of this painting in says more than its content. It’s created with traditional street art graffiti and samples of cartoon kitsch-like animations. However, it exudes elements of prestige, glitz, and glare as every element dazzles with diamonds. It’s as though the artist created a story combining the art of Andy Warhol and Damien Hirst.


Although it tells a somewhat disheartening story, the art itself is very comforting and peaceful to my Gen-Z brain. Taking the style and the content together, it’s a very relatable piece to practically anyone who grew up in the West. It also fits right in with the broader theme, that being the simple beauty of the Puerto Vallarta art scene.


Figure 9, Gallery Uno
Figure 10, Gallery Uno
Figure 11, Gallery Pacifico
Figure 12, Gallery Pacifico


Created by two different artists and curated by two distinct galleries, I can’t help but notice the sculptures in Figures 12 & 13 convey similar feelings. In a city renowned for its beauty and comradery, here are two artists expressing feelings of loneliness & isolation.


It’s easy for me to sit there with a strawberry marg in hand, having the time of my life with my best buddies in this foreign country, and ask “How could one ever express these types of feelings when living in such a beautiful place?”. But the logical part of my brain persists, and though I can’t relate in this very moment to the artists who spent weeks, months, if not years, compelling themselves to create something so vulnerable, I can through my association of ideas, recognize their pain in my own.


Though I can’t tap into the pain I’ve dealt with in my past, nor would I ever wish to go to that place again. I recognize it was once there, and may well have its place in my future. As any old philosophy book will tell you, understanding that pain is the first step to overcoming it. Recognizing this pain in the art of the most beautiful foreign country I’ve visited is, in an odd way, very reassuring because it comes with an understanding that pain transcends the individual, it is universal.


Figure 13, Gallery Uno
Figure 14, Gallery Pacifico

Saying Puerto Vallarta’s art scene neglects the didactic qualities of much of today’s contemporary art is a naive misunderstanding of their production. Following in the likes of Frida Kahlo, it’s now evident to me how they seamlessly blend such qualities with the aesthetic, expressive, and otherwise cathartic experiences art is intended for.

Trotsky was right in that it’s art’s duty to reflect today’s most poignant hypocrisies. However, Frida Kahlo showed us that both the most benign and the most malevolent pieces of art are victims to those same contradictions. The beautiful art in figures 15 and 16 for example do a great job representing, through paint and colour, my experiences in Puerta Vallarta. However, I doubt I’ll ever see the day mainstream media chooses to display such beauty when describing a place like Mexico.


The Mexican revolutionary spirit pioneered by the likes of Frida Kahlo hasn’t disappeared unlike some may think at first glance. It’s merely hidden in between the aesthetic and expressive primitive notions art relies on. It’s the relationship between these qualities that makes the art so beautiful.


Figure 15, The Loft Gallery
Figure 16, The Loft Gallery



References

Colectika

Corsica

Emotions by Corsica

Galeria Pajaro Rojo

Browne Galeria

Galeria Uno

Galeria Pacifico

The Loft Galeria

The Courier’s Glitches Through the Mojave Wasteland

Posted on by Jaustin

Glitch Art Inspired by Fallout New Vegas


To blow off steam during exam season I’ve started playing Fallout New Vegas in honor of the popular TV show airing today. Traveling the Mojave Wasteland I’ve been inspired in the most unexpected ways.



The aesthetics and its absurdities are a staple and in this case a muse. However, the occasional glitches natural in the fifteen-year-old game have been my largest inspiration.


The glitches in the video game speak to the frustrations we have in our system. The benign battles we face on a day-to-day basis. When your bus is twenty minutes late or when you follow the wrong directions, you are faced with a glitch in the system. You can order an Uber or search new directions to bypass the glitch. However, like downloading a mod to fix a bug, the glitch doesn’t truly go away, it just gets buried beneath the new code.



Modding over a glitch removes the problem from the domain of the senses but it remains there intellectually. Just because we can’t immediately feel its repercussions doesn’t mean we can ignore its existence. Calling an Uber immediately fixes the bus situation, but we know we have to account for twenty-minute delays in the future.



Besides, no matter how fast we adapt, the more we live life the more prone we are to future glitches. From this perspective, glitches are like wounds and the mods we deploy to fix them are our battle scars.


Though there are only so many ways to get a “battle scar”, each scar is inherently unique. Such a uniqueness is celebrated in popular culture.  We see war veterans celebrated in the media for their battle scars. We also see fictional characters like Harry Potter and the Joker both revered and despised for such features. 



Repurposing these glitches in Fallout New Vegas illustrates similar feelings. The frustration involved in stumbling across a glitch and having to comb through paragraphs of tutorials to find the solution reminds me of the times my bus was twenty minutes late and I had to call an Uber to avoid being late for work. At the same time, the absurd aesthetics of these glitches are a unique feature that can be celebrated with the proper perspective. When I’m in the Uber instead of the bus, I see architecture in neighborhoods I’m less familiar with. There’s a sense of beauty in the new. 


Like a battle scar, an artist couldn’t recreate these glitches if they tried. They’re the result of a hitch in the system, a system far more complex than any one mind can understand.  When the bus is twenty minutes late we can claim to know its cause, I.E. construction. However, that cause only calls into question further causes until we’re left with an inadequate explanation. 



Instead of frustrating oneself by searching for the root cause of these glitches, it’s possible to recognize their existence as serene. They are natural phenomena amidst the artificial landscape of the hyperreal, a terrific consequence of the system.

“The Power to Destroy a Thing is the Absolute Control Over It” – Dune Diaries 1.01

Posted on by Jaustin

An analysis of Frank Herbert’s (in)famous quote featured in the first Dune book & the second film.


Art by Marc Simonetti


“The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it”

– Paul Muad’Dib, 


This line comes in the tail end of the second dune film and is a direct quotation from the original book. This is about Paul’s threat to nuke the spice reserves on Dune and subsequently topple the patriarchy of the great houses of the Landsraad and the rest of the Imperium. Spice is the drug harvested on Arrakis, representing the greatest export in the Dune universe. It prolongs life, gives one the ability to see the future, and allows “guild navigators” to bend space-time to access interplanetary travel. 


Of all of the controversial quotes uttered by Frank Herbert’s character, Paul Atreidies in the first Dune book, this one has always stuck out to me, and I was beyond happy to see its place in the movie. If you critically analyze the quote, the logic seems dubious at best: 

To destroy something is to attack it. 

An overabundance of evidence in history and military theory has shown humans it’s far easier to defend than to attack. 

Having control over a thing refers to the degree of influence one has on it.

The easier one can influence something, the more control they have over it. 

Therefore, having “absolute control” over a system would be to defend it, not to attack and destroy it, hence Paul is wrong in his assessment. 


This asks the question, why would a character like Paul Atreidies commit such a fallacy when the stakes are so high? The same Paul Atreidies who has trained as a mentat (human-computer), practiced the bene gesserit rituals and has unlocked not only all of his ancestors’ memories but all the possible futures as well. Those who have read the preceding books may be able to answer this question, but for those who still need to, let me assure you, it is not lazy writing by Frank Herbert, it’s very much the opposite. Without going into spoiler territory for the other books and future movies, allow me to explain. 


“Observe the plans within plans within plans”

– Baron Vladimir Harkonnen

“The thing the ecologically illiterate don’t realize about an ecosystem is that it’s a system. A System! A system maintains a certain fluid stability that can be destroyed by a misstep in just one niche.”

– Pardot Kynes – “Appendix I: The Ecology of Dune


When Paul says “the power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it”, he isn’t referring to just the spice reserves, it extends to the power system that the spice is a finite extension of. In part 1, young Paul witnesses how economics (the Guild/CHOAM), politics (The Landsraad), and religion (The Bene Gesserit) can unite to produce a power so chaotic it can obliterate those under its whim. Pardot Kynes’s quote above exemplifies how Frank Herbert pictured this power structure. Just like in ecology, one simple misstep is enough to topple an entire system.


Paul, after reluctantly following his Bene Gesserit mother’s lead, manipulates the Fremen into being their prophet thereby controlling their religion. Then, using his religious power, starts a guerrilla war in the desert with the Fremen to destroy the Harkoneen spice reserves, ousting their economic power. Uniting his religious and economic power, Paul calls for a Jihad, an all-out invasion of the final third of the system, its political power. Though at this point it’s understood Paul’s fedaykin and sandworms have the prowess to defeat anyone in the entire universe, The Landsraad makes it clear they will not simply abide by his demands. Paul, being the prescient being he is, knew how this would shake out, and used the quote as an empty threat. Paul relies on the spice for his religious and economic power just as much as the imperium for its political power. Though he knows this, The Landsraad does not. By threatening one niche component of the system it was destroyed just as Pardot Kynes predicted, and Paul’s jihad succeeds before it even begins. 


Among many things, Dune is a treatise on power expanding on the works of thinkers like Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes was a political philosopher who lived through the English Civil War and witnessed the beheading of King Charles the 1st. Due to his experiences in the war, Hobbes was a staunch pacifist and argued that supreme authority was a right limited to humans. Hobbes argued that authority is necessary no matter how tyrannical it is because it produces order which is a far better alternative to chaos. Hobbes takes this point even further arguing that if a ruler is tyrannical, it is not the ruler’s fault but his people, for if people could rule themselves there would be no need for a governmental structure. Hobbes’s theory may be bleak, but it seems to hold up in court. We only have to look across the Mediterranean to the Middle East for an example of his argument in action today. But at the same time, Hobbes’s theory seems to only account for about half of history’s declarations of war. Sure Hobbes logically cripples revolutions, but what about the wars started by those in power? According to Hobbes, the people are required to swear obedience to those in power. If those in power declare war, the people will inevitably produce the same type of chaos Hobbes is trying to avoid. Circling back to the duneiverse, it was Emperor Shaddam who first declared war on the Atreides by granting them the fiefdom of Arrakis. Emperor Shaddam being a puppet and a shell of a leader presents an obvious (albeit weak) rebuttal to Hobbes. But does Frank Herbert not contradict himself by replacing Paul with the Emperor? Sure Paul may be a much more benevolent and charismatic emperor than Mr.Shaddam, but he’s an emperor nonetheless. 


Thomas Hobbes, detail of an oil painting by John Michael Wright; in the National Portrait Gallery, London

“Some have decried Dune as an exemplar of the most toxic tropes lurking in science fiction, calling the novel an orientalist fever dream, a pean to eugenics, and a seductive monument to fascist aesthetics; others look at the same text and see an excoriation of hero-worship, a cautionary tale of revolutionary dreams betrayed, and a warning about Indigenous sovereignty subverted by a charismatic charlatan.” – Joshua Pearson, The Tribune The Contested Politics of ‘Dune’ (tribunemag.co.uk)


There’s something fascinating about a book that can produce such powerful reactions to diametrically opposed ideologies. Again, those who have read the latter books have a better idea of Herbert’s stance on Hobbes’s authoritarianism. However, without going into spoilers I will do my best to paint of picture of Herbert’s insights from the first two movies (book 1) alone. To do this I’ll bring up another political philosopher, England’s Lord Acton. Lord Acton is famous for the quote “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”, implying that Hobbes’s authoritarianism won’t get society anywhere. It’s also worth noting Lord Acton was a Confederate and saw Abraham Lincoln’s and the North’s cause as radical tyranny. Obviously, Acton’s politics did not age well, but, his famous quote certainly did. We’re all weary of the evil stirring in the “villains” of the world; the Harkkonens, the Putins, or the Kim Jong Un’s. But what of our heroes, should we not be weary of them as well? Blindly following Paul’s threat to nuke the spice reserves, whether he goes through with it or not, will lead to chaos to an unimaginable degree, a galactic-wide Jihad. Critically analyzing the threat on the other hand proves not only is it illogical, but an empty threat at that. Paul’s prescience only gets him so far, he is playing the political game as much as the rest of them, but only he can see the ensuing effects. 



If Paul is the only one aware of the chaos ensuing due to his decisions, he is to blame. Therefore, if Paul creates the chaos he envisions, Hobbes’s authoritarianism fails miserably. This is one of the thought experiments Frank Herbert asks you to enter in the climax of the first book. Hidden between the lines, the plans within plans begin to reveal themself, but only to those paying the utmost attention.  


Paul’s military quest was merely a distraction for his Coup d’état. His logical fallacy “The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it”, is a veiled threat meant to manipulate his opponent’s emotions and to make a play for the imperium’s political power. At this moment, Herbert’s complex and sometimes even contradictory ideologies begin to unravel, forcing us to look inward at our perceptions of the hero of the story. To some, Paul is the greatest liberator to walk Arrakis, while to others, he’s the fiercest tyrant.



“Fear is the mind-killer”- The Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear


If you’re still unconvinced by Frank Herbert’s writing prowess, let me refresh you on the Gom Jabbar, the needle Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam forces against Paul’s neck as he sticks his hand inside the torture box.  “Gom Jabbar” translates to “The High Handed enemy”, and is a needle dipped in cyanide designed to bring instantaneous death. We see the Bene Gesserit use the Gom Jabbar to test Paul’s humanity, specifically whether or not his awareness can overcome his animal instincts. If Paul pulled his hand out of the torture box to relieve the pain, his animal instincts would prove too strong and he would die, like a mouse squirming out of a trap. But having sufficient knowledge and awareness of the situation means you have no choice but to endure the pain to live on. As we know, Paul succeeds the Gom Jabbar test and qualifies as a “human” in the eyes of the Bene Gessereit. However, we also know that in the eyes of the Bene Gessereit, Paul is a failed experiment, the product of a defector who knowingly disobeyed the Sister’s orders and foiled the Bene Gesserit 1000+ year eugenic plans. So why is it that when Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam has the Gom Jabbar to Paul’s neck, she doesn’t kill him right there and finish off the plans she and Emperor Shaddam set forth in the first place? To frame this in another context; Gaius Helen Mohiam has “The power to destroy [Paul], by having absolute control over [him]”, yet she chooses not to without making it clear why.  


Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam chooses not to destroy Paul because she doesn’t believe in Paul’s philosophy. Through their actions, she and the rest of the Bene Gesserit demonstrate having control over a thing is far more than having the ability to destroy it. The religions they’ve manipulated across Arrakis and the Imperium have cultivated an order more benevolent than the alternative. The seeds they’ve planted in the form of rituals and words across cultures produce a far more stable sense of control than destroying whatever power relies on. They recognize dangling the sword of Damocles over their subject’s head will only get them so far. To the Bene Gesserit, destroying a thing is not gaining control over it, that’s like amputating your arm because of a paper cut.  A rash, impulsive, and borderline animal instinct to a human problem. A far more appropriate play is to adapt to the wheels of power and to conspire within it. If this Frankenstein creation named Paul Muad’ib turns out to be the Kwisatz Haderach they’ve been prophesying for thousands of years, killing him would be blasphemy, an unimaginable waste of power, like throwing out the world’s fastest computer. The possibility of controlling such power gives the Bene Gesserit delusions of grandeur, visions of a utopia they prophesied centuries ago. Whether or not the Bene Gesserit succeeds in these plans is of little importance to Herbert’s philosophy. The Gom Jabbar is another thought experiment that goes beyond the old adage of what it means to be human, it also asks what control means to you, and why do we as humans seek it in such a primal fashion. 


The quote “The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it” has been one of the more popular quotes in the first book among the fandom and for good reason. It is one of the first instances Herbert asks the viewer to look inward at their own perceptions of the hero. But without critical thought, it goes over many readers’/viewers’ heads, and they slowly slip into the same tragic hero-worship syndrome we see in the Fremen like Stilgar. Reading between each line the plans within plans slowly reveal themselves, and the scathing critiques of authoritarianism begin to penetrate the consciousness like sunlight poking through the fringes of a curtain. Herbert’s authoritarianism lies in the shadows unlike so much popular media and as a result, paints a much more apt comparison to how these political structures shape reality today. Depending on your situation, It’s easy to predict how politicians like Donald Trump through their sheer recklessness and determination will lead to chaos for example, but what about the seemingly benevolent leaders like Joe Biden? Do we blindly follow their lead because they have our best interests at heart, like Stilgar following Paul, or do we forego our desires and hold onto our principles, like Chani? History has taught us there isn’t an answer to this question, it depends on the individual. However, history has also taught us the lessons of philosophers like Thomas Hobbes and Lord Acton. The best we can do is learn from the knowledge of the past and rely on reason to guide us instead of our base animal instincts, the thing the Bene Gesserit try so hard to stamp out. 


References


Brinton, Crane. “Lord Acton’s Philosophy of History.” The Harvard Theological Review, vol. 12, no. 1, 1919, pp. 84–112. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1507914. Accessed 17 Mar. 2024.

Duncan, Stewart. “Thomas Hobbes.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 12 Feb. 2021, plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes/.

Harrington, Pat. “Brief Reflections on the Politics of Dune.” Counter Culture, 10 Feb. 2023, countercultureuk.com/2021/10/30/brief-reflections-on-the-politics-of-dune/.

Mosovsky, Jan. “Dune: A Story about Power.” 4liberty.Eu, Liberty Education, 8 Nov. 2021, 4liberty.eu/dune-a-story-about-power/.

Art by:

Marc Simonetti & H.R. Giger

The Greatest Concert You’ve Never Heard

Posted on by Jaustin

An analysis of Wyclef Jean’s seminal performance of The Star-Spangled Banner at Woodstock ’99



“The Greatest Concert You’ve Never Heard Of”, an in-depth documentary of Wyclef Jean’s performance of The Star-Spangled Banner at Woodstock ‘99. When most people think of Woodstock ‘99, their mind goes to the tumultuous riots that capped the 20th century. However, the riots overshadow Wyclef Jean’s seminal performance that sends 21st century America a message so poignant even the most traditional reactionaries can’t help but recognize. 


On a personal note, this is my first time experimenting with this medium (writing YouTube essays), so criticism is encouraged! I’m worried about the video’s length, so feel free to tell me if it’s too long! All of the research, writing, and editing came purely from passion, I believe Wyclef Jean is one of the most important artists to come out over the past few decades. So, it brings me joy to share his vision with you guys. With that said, I really hope to hear your thoughts on the video. 


All in all, I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to view my work. Whether you’re an artist, a writer, a filmmaker, a content creator, etc, The goal remains the same; Benign Malevolence is here to unite creatives who feel overwhelmed by the culture industry. I hope videos like these can be a small step in that process.

My Transition into a Cyborg

Posted on by Jaustin


Face Reveal by Jaustin (2024)


Is Art Dead?


Being an artist in 2024 sometimes feels like working as a cashier for Blockbuster in the late 2000s. Although our jobs and livelihoods are being threatened by some intangible technological insurrection, we have no choice but to keep our heads down and push forward.


Artists tend to fall into one of two camps regarding the AI-art revolution. Some fear its inevitable fate, while others embrace it with open arms.


As evidenced by Face Reveal (The piece of art above), I tend to lean towards the latter camp. But I wouldn’t be honest with myself, nor an artist for that matter if I didn’t take all of my emotions into account. The fact that a computer can produce my vision in 10 seconds compared to the days, weeks, or months it takes me to sketch out my ideas is a bit disconcerting. The logical response to that is to simply use AI to produce my visions far more efficiently. But every artist knows there’s a sense of pride that accompanies the craftsmanship of each creation.


However, that assumes there’s no sense of craftsmanship in AI art. It took a level of skill on my part to maneuver AI in such a way to create Face Reveal. Moreover, I know my audience can’t recreate Face Reveal, which gives me the similar feeling of fulfillment I get as an artist creating something with my traditional skillset. If AI art produces the same quality of craftsmanship seen in traditional art, what distinguishes the two? If nothing fundamentally distinguishes AI art from traditional art is there even a point in either loving or loathing art’s impending paradigm shift? It’s these types of debates that take for granted this terrific time we as creators are currently living in, and ultimately what it means to be human.


Reading 

Do Not Research ‘s article The Origin of Cyborgs, Kit Katay’s take on Donna Haraway’s 1985 essay: A Cyborg Manifesto, I was reminded of Haraway’s prescience. Haraway showed us we wouldn’t be humans if it weren’t for technology, and that it is through tech we’ll evolve beyond what it means to be ourselves. 35 odd years later our transcendence into “cyborgs” has taken a giant leap forward with the AI revolution. This AI art vs. Human art debate is futile. Instead, AI art will be viewed as an extension of our senses like any other technology. This metamorphosis of AI and Human art taking over the hyperreal is a demonstration of Haraway’s theory in action, a continuous globalized and mechanized piece of performance art, and a part of our inevitable transition into cyborgs.


Our Cyborg Transition


A Cyborg Manifesto Alternate Cover (1985)


In Donna Haraway’s 1985 provocative essay A Cyborg Manifesto, she explores the inexorable mutation between humans and machines. Her essay concludes that this fusion is inevitable, merely a biological step in our evolutionary process. But through this transition into cyborgs, there is hope to emancipate the culture.


The term “cyborg” is a metaphor for this evolution. It represents the idea that traditional categories like human vs. machine, or tangible vs. intangible no longer provide useful context for understanding the complexities of existence. Cyborgs aren’t weighed down by traditional social norms, are not divided by race or religion, nor are they prone to prejudice. Instead, they are free from rigid identities (Haraway, 1985).


Our transition into cyborgs began when we took control of our environment. Historically, humans bent to nature’s whim. We didn’t develop fire or learn to communicate until nature dictated it was time to sacrifice our physical strength for greater mental capacity (Katay, 2024). We didn’t evolve into homo sapiens until nature presented us with the opportunity. Today though, we are now the masters of our environment. We are using technology like CRISPR-Cas9 to reprogram the code in our genes, developing sustainable synthetic biological organisms. Destroying natural ecosystems in the name of profit, building artificial ones like the internet to satisfy our rates of consumption. No longer do we abide by environmental constraints like space and time, the only thing holding us back is ourselves.


When we are the masters of our environment and its pressures, and wield the resources and power to change them, we choose what we become. A generation of social-technological interference could alter human genetics forever”(Katay, 2024).


35 years later, is this cyborg epoch Donna Haraway predicted as much of a techno-utopia as she hoped it’d be? Thanks to technology, more fluid social dynamics have flourished and hit the mainstream like feminism for example. There’s an increased focus on progressive policies in Western society. Overall, our quality of life has increased dramatically across the world.


But at what cost? The necessity of technology has paved the way for a reliance on such tools. The cyborg generation born at the crest of the information age knows no life without the internet. The internet is just as much a part of Gen-Z’s central nervous system as any other motor function. Being an extension of our senses, the internet morphs into the psyche like two atoms colliding, and the result is a loss of self. In an act to keep up with the current tech, take part in trends, and stay connected, we chip away at our identity and replace it with the melting pot that is the internet. Haraway was right in that the cyborg evolution would replace such rigid identities, however, replacing the self with the cyborg is conforming by nature.


The Cyborg Artist


Untitled by RonjaFman (2024)


Have you ever considered how we are in a ”loneliness epidemic” despite being in the most connected time in history? When you consider the implications of this reliance on technology the answers seem pretty obvious. Sacrificing one’s identity can have disastrous consequences psychologically. The constant pressure to conform leading to the loss of identity means we aren’t communicating substance, merely spewing the same string of propositions with slightly different sentence structures. No wonder society feels so lonely when everyone’s on the internet reposting the same talking points and repeating the same trends, slowly pushing culture forward a millimeter at a time. Instead of being the culture mover social media was once advertised as, every day it gets closer to realizing its potential as one gigantic mirror for society to gawk at, which is a poetic metaphor for the birthplace of the selfie.


The rampant, unfiltered technological revolution has ushered society into a new epoch and the results are unpredictable. Who would have thought the result of instantaneous communication is a loneliness epidemic?  What it means to be a human has an entirely different meaning compared to 1000, 100, or even 10 years ago. Therefore these masochistic news cycles perpetuating seemingly benign debates like human art vs AI art are meaningless. We aren’t humans, we are cyborgs. And art is merely just a fragment of this paradigm shift. Just like any other industry, sheer efficiency and the impulse for profits will take precedence over any sentimentality. The reality is artists have no choice but to adapt. This may be daunting, but just as Donna Haraway predicted, more than anything it will be liberating.


To understand the role of the cyborg artist in the information age we have to recontextualize what art means today. Historically, art’s foundation was in religion (Benjamin, 1969). The bigger the impact a work of art had on its theology,  the more valuable society deemed it. However, this took a drastic shift amidst the Industrial Revolution as art’s value was shaped in a different context. Instead of being based on a religious “cult” value”, the newfound ability to mechanically reproduce art meant we could disperse it globally, and as a result, the messages embedded within a work of art would spread like wildfire. Essentially, while the Industrial Revolution emancipated art’s reliance on religion, it replaced it with another artificial value, a political one. All of the most famous works of art within the Industrial Revolution have some sort of political ideology, whether intentional or not; Think of Picasso’s Guernica, Warhaol’s Campbell’s Soup, or Bacon’s Pope.


So, if the Industrial Revolution led to the politicizing of art, what does that mean for this impending technological revolution? On one hand, more tech = more politics. The faster we can communicate ideologies, the faster the public will gobble them up and rehash them during their work breaks and dinners. However, intuition tells me a tipping point is inevitable. Where has this idealistic political hot potato gotten aesthetics? Not very far if we’re being honest. Political-based art has led to a qualitative shift in movements like Haraway’s feminism, but quantitative issues facing society have remained, such as poverty, police brutality, and now the loneliness epidemic! In the long run, relying on AI to improve art’s political impact seems blissfully ignorant. A far more likely conclusion seems to me that this inevitable fusion of AI art and political-based aesthetics will produce ideologies far faster than humans can comprehend, and as a result will lose our appetites. The political value of art will wither away and something anew will take it’s place.


If we’re not careful, this new value propping up the aura of a work of art in the age of the AI revolution could be as simple as capital. It may sound ridiculous to deem a work of art more impactful than the next because of the money it netted. However, the media can’t help but compare box office budgets, auction prices, album sales, drilling these numbers into our brain as if it’s the art’s essence. Whether art’s newfound value hinges on capital, on followers, or on onlyfans subscribers, regardless, art is not dead, it has merely evolved. Through trial and error, my fellow cyborg artists and I will not only search for the meaning of this emergence; it’s true value, but be a driving force behind it, dancing between the mechanisms of today’s revolutionary technological advancements, and today’s most passionate human stories. If that’s not liberating, I don’t know what is.


“We must expect great innovations to transform the entire technique of the arts, thereby affecting artistic invention itself and perhaps even bringing about an amazing change in our very notion of art” – Paul Valery


References


Adorno, Theodor W., and J. M. Bernstein. “Transparencies on film.” The Culture Industry, 2020, pp. 178–186, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003071297-8.

Benjamin, Walter. (1969). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.. In Arendt, Hannah (Eds.), Illuminations: Essays and Reflections (pp. 217-251). Schocken Books

Couto, Sarah Do. “Loneliness Is Now a ‘Global Public Health Concern,’ Says Who – National.” Global News, Global News, 16 Nov. 2023, globalnews.ca/news/10095898/loneliness-global-public-health-concern-who/#:~:text=The%20World%20Health%20Organization%20%28WHO%29%20has%20warned%20that,public%20health%20concern%E2%80%9D%20of%20loneliness%20and%20social%20isolation.

Haraway, Donna J. “A cyborg manifesto.” The Socialist Review, 1 Apr. 1985, pp. 3–90, https://doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816650477.003.0001.

Katay, Kit. Kat Kitay: The Origin of Cyborgs, Do Not Research, 11 Dec. 2023, substack.com/home/post/p-122585960.

Plato. The Project Gutenberg eBook of the Republic, by Plato, Project Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org/files/1497/1497-h/1497-h.htm. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023.

Wachowski, Lilly, et al. The Matrix.

Other links

Francis Bacon’s paintings

Benny Safdie & Nathan Fielder: The Curse

Reddit: Place 2023

Untitled by Ronjafman, 2024

CRISPR-Cas9

Built by Silkworms | Neri Oxman’s “Silk Pavilion II”

Quality of Life Index

Matt Johnson’s “Blackberry” as Modern Canadian History

Posted on by Jaustin

What makes Matt Johnson’s “Blackberry” so important to Canadian art history


My job as an artist is to connect the myths of my country with the future

– Bjork.


That is a quote I first heard in an interview with Matt Johnson, the director of Blackberry, a movie about the invention of the world’s first smartphone in Waterloo, Ontario. Although Canada’s history is just as rich and diverse as many other nations we’re so accustomed to hearing about, it doesn’t get the same level of respect, at least from Hollywood’s perspective. So, when Matt Johnson set out to create the true story of Blackberry, he not only created one of the films of the year but also helped tell Canada’s story as a key player in modern history.


Of course, it’s the real-life Mike Lazaridis, Douglas Fregin, and Jim Balsillie who are responsible for the technological revolution that was Blackberry. However, as Yuval Noah Harari says, it’s the stories we tell that define us as humans.


You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
― Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind


Therefore, without Matt Johnson’s exceptional storytelling of the drama of Blackberry, Canada’s prominence in the most recent technological revolution would still be a stone left unturned in the eyes of the public. The way Matt Johnson captures late 90’/early 00’s Ontario and the impending cyber-race led by a few Canadian nerds evokes nostalgia and inspiration that can be felt not only by our country’s people but by the world, for decades to come.


What Makes Blackberry Special?




Starting from the very first shot in the film Matt Johnson places his Canadian audience into a time machine by relaying radio broadcasters’ commentary after a trademark Toronto Maple Leafs loss over a drive west on the 401. Anyone growing up in Ontario at this time is more than accustomed to hearing the groans of our city’s sportscasters over our car’s speakers early in the morning while driving through the endless factories and farmlands that make up this part of the highway.


This contrast making up the stretch of land from Toronto to Waterloo is the perfect analogy for Matt Johnson’s film. The way these obscene factories abruptly jam themselves in between and displace Canada’s abundant agriculture in the name of efficiency is very much akin to Jim Balsillie and the rest of Blackberry’s rise to glory, and their tragic demise.


Highway 401 in the 1960’s
Highway 401 Today


We all know how the Industrial Revolution came to be, through its efficiency and stability it proved to be a better system than the agricultural systems dominating the world at the time. Blackberry used these same advantages to take over the phone market at the beginning of the 21st century. Led by the intellectual prowess of Mike Lazardis and the ruthless business skills of Jim Balsillie, Blackberry managed to mass-produce the most efficient and stable phone in the world from the little-known Canadian city of Waterloo.


If you’ve ever been to Waterloo you probably find it just as amazing as I do how Blackberry managed to (illegally) recruit the world’s smartest engineers and developers to this little city about an hour west of Toronto. Waterloo doesn’t have much going for it if you’re not a college student looking to drink the weekend away. Yet at the start of the 21st century, Waterloo, Ontario was the technological capital of the world.



Thanks to the tyranny of Jim Balsillie that would scare the likes of Dracula, the capital of Blackberry’s empire, Waterloo, Ontario, was thriving. Tech geniuses were migrating to the city by the hundreds to play their part in this technological revolution and venture capitalists were flying in their private jets begging Blackberry to take their money.


However, as soon as the company rose to fame, their hubris got the best of them, and they crashed and burned twice as fast. The trademark efficiency Blackberry became known for started to lag behind its competitors and its market share began to dwindle. To retake their position Blackberry sought greater levels of efficiency by moving their manufacturing to China, abandoning not only their Waterloo headquarters but their principles in the process.


“Made in China, the mark of the beast”

– Douglas Fregin (Blackberry, 2023)


One of the first sentences said by Matt Johnson’s character at the beginning of the film. Sure Blackberry’s move to China increased the quantity of their product, however, it was a critical blow to their quality. Cutting corners in respect of the chase for greater efficiency and profit margins is what brought Blackberry its success, but it’s what led to its downfall as well, making this story a Greek tragedy in every sense of the definition.

Blackberry as Canadian History



It’s important to remember Canada’s level of responsibility regarding the degree of technological innovation taking place today. Without Matt Johnson’s storytelling, this fact could easily slip through the cracks of history. This is why I find this film so important not just to Canadian film history, but to modern Canadian history.


I don’t mean to compare Blackberry to other great Canadian movies like Goin’ Down the Road (1970). However, that’s the beauty of art. You aren’t supposed to compare, merely to enjoy. That said I do think Matt Johnson did an incredible job bringing that Bjork quote to life; turning the myths of our country into the future through art.

Starry Night(s): “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.”

Posted on by Jaustin

How the mechanical reproduction of art led to World War II


We must expect great innovations to transform the entire technique of the arts, thereby affecting artistic invention itself and perhaps even bringing about an amazing change in our very notion of art. – Paul Valery

Vincent Van Gogh’s “Starry Nights” at the MoMa (2023) photo by me

From Cult Value to Exhibition Value



I took the photo above at the MoMa because it’s a perfect analogy for Walter Benjamin’s essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Benjamins’ work is interested in how art changed amidst the Industrial Revolution, specifically in art’s transition from its perceived “cult value” to its newfound “exhibition value”. What gave a piece of art its “cult” status was its aura and magic. Previously, if one wanted to experience Van Gogh’s Starry Night they must be in a unique time and place. Today, all one has to do is look it up online and order a reprint. Any semblance of cult value in a work of art has diminished drastically. As evident in the photo above, the audience is more interested in reproducing the piece of art as a photo than experiencing it as a unique phenomenon of history.


That’s not to say the cult value of art should take precedence over its exhibition value. In fact, the mechanical reproduction of art liberated it because by having its value in the cult, it was dependent on ritual. Historically, a work of art was only as valuable as society deemed it. Today, one can value a work of art for any reason they see fit.


However, art’s inevitable liberation brought on unforeseen repercussions in how it’s consumed. Exhibition value first displaced cult value with the invention of photography. Photographs are not just works of art but are historical testimonies that hold political significance. The added political weight to a work of art makes it harder for the audience to differentiate between criticism and enjoyment because it builds an intimate and sympathetic, or in Benjamin’s words, a progressive reaction. The ritual-based relationship cult-valued art used to have has merely been replaced by a political-based relationship with exhibition-value art.


The Progressive Reaction of Exhibition-based Art


Mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses towards art… The reactionary attitude toward a Picasso painting changes into the progressive reaction toward a Chaplin movie.

– Walter Benjamin (The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, pg.235)


Progressive reactions mean “the conventional is uncritically enjoyed, and the truly new is criticized with aversion” (pg.236). This is because an individual’s perception of art is influenced by the mass audience’s reaction. For example, the public loves the Avengers movies because they know what to expect but critiques Ari Asters Beau is Afraid because it caught them off guard. Moreover, quantity has surpassed quality. The Avengers is a more important film because it has sold x-more tickets.


Reproducing art to such an extent has made us accustomed to its presence. Historically, seeing a painting of a skull would permit all sorts of emotions, dread, fear, and paranoia of a bad omen. Today, we see skulls on clothes, in ads, in emojis, likely multiple times a day. So much art no longer produces a reactionary sense of concentration, but only a progressive sense of distraction.


“For the Love of God” by Damien Hirst (2007)
David with the Head of Goliath by Caravaggio (1609)

The mass reproduction of art has raised the audience’s tolerance to it like a drug addict chasing their next high. Not only that, it’s also dulled our senses, making us vulnerable to ideologies infringing on aesthetics. Today ideology and aesthetics are inseparable. An art-house film of purely abstract images will still provoke ideology, even if that ideology is a rejection of all others. This is dangerous because the audience is led to believe this is of their own volition, however, as Theodor Adorno first argued, our reactions are merely mimetic impulses orchestrated by the powers that be, like a game of operation.




The consumers are made to remain what they are: consumers. That is why the culture industry is not the art of the consumer but rather the projection of the will of those in control onto their victims. The automatic self-reproduction of the status quo in its established forms is itself an expression of domination.

– Theodor Adorno (Transparencies on Film, pg.185)


What happens when the powers that be don’t have the consumer’s best interests at heart? History has shown us what happens when perverse ideologies are integrated into mass-produced aesthetics.


The Mechanical Reproduction of Fascism


In principle, a work of art has always been reproducible. However, the mass scale of mechanically reproduced aesthetics brought on by the Industrial Revolution and the invention of photography around the 1900s is something else entirely. For the first time, art is no longer limited by time and space, meaning ideologies can spread like wildfire. Combine that with the mindless progressive reactions produced by consuming art, it is easy to see how manipulative ideologies underlying aesthetics can be.


Fascist poet and founder of the Futurist art movement Filippo Marinetti is one of the first to discover how the mechanical reproduction of art led to its politicizing. His futurist movement weaponized aesthetics as a means to manipulate the masses. Facists discovered the progressive reactions of mass-produced art can create an inorganic catharsis. The futurist art movement took advantage of this, using art to argue the necessity of war and violence for people to express themselves. This is what provoked thousands of individuals to join various fascist political parties across Europe.


“A man who concentrates before a work of art is absorbed by it. In contrast, the distracted mass absorbs the work of art”. 

– Walter Benjamin (pg. 240)


Ironically, the fascist’s strategy to weaponize aesthetics comes straight out of Marx’s idea of “history being a class struggle,”. This all but proves the inevitability of this aesthetic evolution. How the Industrial Revolution emancipated art is undeniable. No longer is art limited to time, space, or its cult values. However, this liberation also opened up the floodgates for a progressive reaction, and a resulting political-based relationship took its place. Until art transcends this relationship, ideologies will continue to plague aesthetics. Yet being aware of this formula is the first step to rising above it.


References


Adorno, Theodor W., and J. M. Bernstein. “Transparencies on film.” The Culture Industry, 2020, pp. 178–186, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003071297-8. 

Benjamin, Walter. (1969). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.. In Arendt, Hannah (Eds.), Illuminations: Essays and Reflections (pp. 217-251). Schocken Books

Bergman, Ingmar. Films Incorporated. (1957). The Seventh seal. Chicago.

Bowler, A. Politics as art. Theor Soc 20, 763–794 (1991). https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.torontomu.ca/10.1007/BF00678096

Caravaggio, David with the Head of Goliath (1609)

Hirst, Damien. For the Love of God (2007)

Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Monthly Review Press, (1998) (republication) (original publication 1846).

Francis Bacon’s “Painting (1946)”

Posted on by Jaustin

I finally got to see my favorite painting ever, Francis Bacon’s “Painting 1946” at the MoMa.


Earlier in the year I saw some works of the renowned artist & personal inspiration, Francis Bacon, at the MoMa. But to say I merely saw them is an understatement. 31 years after his death, Bacon’s paintings sent me on a surrealist trip only the likes of Hunter S. Thompson could aptly describe. There is something in Bacon’s haunting and violent brushstrokes that confronts human nature at its core. Bacon’s paintings presuppose the idea that art should provoke complex and intense emotional responses buried in the psyche, oftentimes coinciding with the darker aspects of the human equation.


Me beside a Bacon Piece
Painting (1946) by Francis Bacon


“Painting (1946)” famously captures Bacon’s aesthetic, depicting a terrifying scene where an anonymous individual oversees the butchery of meat that looks vaguely human. Though Bacon denies this, as he denies imprinting any such narratives onto his art, many people believe the half-faced individual is former UK prime minister Nevile Chamberlain, who took office directly after Churchill amid WW2. Chamberlain is infamous for his “Appeasement policy”, which gave Nazi Germany certain parts of Eastern Europe in return for the UK’s freedom. Whether or not the figure is Chamberlain the conversation remains. This painting confronts life post-WW2 by mirroring the trauma and existential dread festering Europe at the time. The cage-like structure surrounding the individual, the microphones off to either side of him, and the umbrella masking his face, evoke anxiety trademarked by the time. 


Painting (1946) is a testament to Francis Bacon’s ability to convey profound emotions and present human nature like none other. His visceral paintings transcend the art form itself by assaulting the audience with the truth of their existence. In doing so, Bacon pushes the boundaries of what it means to express oneself, leaving an imperishable impression on the art world.