On Futurism & Humbug

Marinetti's Futurist Manifesto provides a glimpse inside the mind of one Nietzsche might have referred to as an "ubermensche." The manifesto outlines a sadistic agenda founded in the use of propaganda that, which may rival that of the Third Reich. From what I understand, this is the sort of literature that drove fascism and the Nazism. Yet, Marinetti's Manifesto effectively excites and romanticizes the degenerative behavior that it propagates.

 The Manifesto is littered with contradictory ideas. In his opening the poet, writes, "

Museums: public dormitories where one lies forever beside hated or unknown beings. Museums: absurd abattoirs of painters and sculptors ferociously slaughtering each other with color-blows and line- blows, the length of the fought-over walls!" yet he fails to make such claims about poetry, which I would also consider an art form. In creating art, he embraces his "godly" form and uses it to blaspheme and disgrace his Creator. He pairs the sense invoked by the word "love" and pairs it to those of "danger, defiance, destruction." His rhetoric makes his work effective in arousing passion. The love he describes here is one of the self and of earthly delights. His close-minded, declarative statements do not question the truth, but perpetuate his agenda, which seems to be to exalt himself over others by the manipulation of those in lower social class. He appeals to the "struggle," yet fails to acknowledge that struggle is distinctive to the human condition. The painter struggles against the canvas; he fails to address this perspective. 

He uses the word "love" three times in his manifest. He uses this word out of context. The love he describes, which is inhumane, immoral and injust, comes from the greek, "eros," from which words like erosion are rooted. The sense he is describing is desire. The contrasts the sense "love" conveyed by the greek, "agape," which describes a sense of awe and selflessness, the foundation upon which the model of humanity may be found. "Agape" may be found in the New Testament, whereas "eros" may be found in the Old Testament. In Biblical context, the Marinetti describes the nature of the past, of the world before it received the Word which conveys the image of God. 

The ubermensche, uber-id, behavior this manifesto propagates does not seem to be dead. I think this is largely because much of the populous is unwilling to acknowledge their form as "godly," misusing the word "love" when the sense conveyed is "desire."

These depraving propositions are not dead. Though they seem founded in the past, they have hung-over into the future. The strange thing seems to be that so many seem so willing to embrace ideas such as these and that the techniques employed to perpetuate such agendas are becoming so commonplace that we don’t recognize we sell our time to ourselves and to the corrosion of our minds by embracing ourselves over others, and accepting desire as “love.”

The 21^st century is more convoluted with propaganda than perhaps any other. Techniques employed by advertisers sell us the ideas of love and identity through commercial media such as cinema, television and perhaps, more interestingly, social media, like “facebook.” It’s strange how things seem to have come full circle and art seems to be back right where it began, on walls. Plato’s allegory of "the Cave” comes to mind…
Andy Warhol is sighted as saying, "Beauty? What's that? Beauty in itself is nothing." While I believe that there is something beautiful to be found in many things, persons, art, objects, sense data, etc. But in and of itself nothing would matter, what matters is that nothing, at least nothing we are sensually aware of, really seems to be in and of itself.