Submind YouTube summaries
Thumbnail for The Collapse of Art is Breaking Civilization

The Collapse of Art is Breaking Civilization

Watch on YouTube

Video summary

The speaker argues that contemporary art has largely abandoned the heroic and grandeur found in earlier periods, instead depicting humanity as weak, pathetic, and broken. Since the turn of the 20th century, artistic representation has shifted away from admiration or striving toward a worldview where man is shown as defeated and decaying. This decline mirrors the medieval perspective, where life was viewed as horrible and only an afterlife offered hope, leading to sculptures of gargoyles and monsters rather than heroes. The speaker suggests that modern art has returned to this pessimistic outlook, failing to present any admirable qualities or models for human excellence. In popular culture and media, this trend is evident in television shows and movies that emphasize physicality and the principle that might makes right. Examples such as *Game of Thrones* are cited as narratives focused on power, force, and coercion without featuring true heroes; even when characters change or reveal motives, they often do so in ways that are not particularly virtuous. Similarly, the series *Breaking Bad* is described as a story about a protagonist descending into hell, where every character except the FBI agent is portrayed as a horrible human being. The speaker contends that these works emphasize the horribleness of man and offer nothing for audiences to admire or strive toward, reinforcing a sense of moral decay rather than elevating the human spirit. A second major component of modern art identified by the speaker is non-representational work, which rejects the selective recreation of reality essential to true art. Instead of generating deep values or emotional responses, this type of creation is dismissed as mere design or aesthetics, focusing on patterns and colors that may be visually pleasing but lack substantive meaning. While the speaker acknowledges powerful historical pieces like Munch's *The Scream* that evoke intense negative emotions yet remain great art, he contrasts them with much contemporary work which is neither threatening nor deeply engaging. Ultimately, the video concludes that this shift toward depicting a broken humanity and abandoning realistic representation signifies a collapse in art that is actively breaking civilization by stripping away the values necessary for a thriving society.
Read the full video transcript
I thought the talk was great, by the way, but I I thought you were going to contrast this to sort of the kind of art that's more prevalent nowadays. >> No. >> So, uh >> For example. >> What would you say about like contemporary art, what you see nowadays, or maybe stuff by like I don't know, Basquiat or Picasso. That's a little bit older, but >> I mean, I think most contemporary arts I mean, contemporary art is split into two, I think. Uh one is it it views man as um weak and pathetic and broken and uh you know, there's no heroism, there's no admiration, there's no striving in in, you know, most kind of contemporary arts that we see out there. If there's even man represented in that art, but to the extent he's represented he's not represented in any kind of admirable way. Not something you want to strive to, it's quite the opposite. He's he's represented as you know, worse than the average, as as as defeated and uh and decaying. Uh and you can see that, you know, you can see that really from mostly from the turn of the century, of the 20th century. Uh the last 120 years there's been very little of the um uh you know, again, of of the heroic and the grandeur of art that came before it. Um and it it much more is like, if you will, going back to the medieval times when uh you know, what they represented in sculpture, for example, gargoyles. Right? Uh monsters. Not They weren't interested in presenting heroes because life sucked. I mean, life really did suck. They couldn't imagine anything different, right? The only time life would be better was in an afterlife. This the world Life in this world was horrible. Um and and I think that to a large extent contemporary since the turn of the 20th century has returned back to that. Um in in in movies and in TV shows, what you see is you know, the best TV shows are either shows that highlight physicality. Right? And and uh might makes right. I'm thinking Lord of the not Lord of the Rings. Um Game of Thrones, right? If anybody's watched Game of Thrones, uh which is which is this big hit. It's all about might is right. It's all about power. It's all about force. It's all about coercion and and putting, you know, destroying one another. They're no real heroes in Game of Thrones. And and the heroes when you think you're going to have a hero that either killed or uh you know, or they they they change or they they reveal their true motive, which is not particularly heroic. Or things like um uh God, what was that what was that school teacher becomes a drug dealer? Breaking Bad, right? Breaking Bad. Brilliant writing, brilliant acting, you know, really good structure plot. But what's it about? It's about a guy descending into hell. And there's no virtue there. There's not a single human being there who's a good guy except the FBI guy and he's so pathetic and he's ultimately killed and he can't do anything. All the all the people who actually pursue anything during the the thing are the bad guys, right? They're all horrible human beings. So it's emphasizes the horribleness of of man. There's nothing to admire in Breaking Bad. There's nobody to admire in Breaking Bad. And I think that's you know, that is prevalent again in in in much of modern art. And then there's what I think is the other part of modern art, which is or contemporary art, which is non-representational art, which is it it it takes away the artist's recreation of reality, the the selective recreation of reality in Rand's definition. And there is no selective recreation. And in that sense, I'm not sure it's art. That is I I think it's much more about design, about aesthetics. Some of it's very pretty. Some of it's it even interesting. It has interesting patterns and interesting colors and you might you might hang up on a wall or something you know pretty, but it's not art. It doesn't generate the kind of values and the kind of value response that you get from good art. Even when that Look, I don't even show you admirable art, but I could have showed you uh what's his name? Monk's The Scream. I don't know if any you guys are familiar with Monk's The Scream. But those of you who are, it's a powerful piece of art, right? It evokes real emotions and the emotions are negative. They're horrible. You want to run away, but you know, it's great art. And I I'd say a lot of the contemporary art is blah. It's it's it doesn't it it's not threatening and it's not pleasing. It's just it's just there. It's either You could say, "Yeah, that's pretty." Or it's not pretty, but nothing more than that.