Well I guess I can’t say it wasn’t lacking passion. While I am reading the Manifesto of Futurism I’m constantly unsure if the piece is meant to be a mocking of the Industrial Era or a genuine experiment in the passion of hatred.
Though I’m not entirely sure if it’s related to the main theme, my favorite quote is “Museums: absurd abattoirs of painters and sculptors ferociously slaughtering each other with color-blows and line-blows, the length of the fought-over walls!” Maybe he is referring to a broader issue of competition in the zeitgeist.
Stephanie Sorth
January 30th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
In a way, I think Marinetti’s “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism,” does have relevance in today’s society. In today’s society, we are mostly driven by technology, the future, and the machine. The natural world is slowly slipping into the background. Marinetti also embraces the beauty of speed, which fits well into todays fast paced world. People are always wanting the lastest and fastest in technology, and this idea is ever present when creating new things. However, when Marinetti talks about destroying the past to live in the future, I think this contradicts everything the future stands for. When you think of today’s technology, everything is a progression of things created in the past. Without the past as its core, there would be no ideas for the future. By destroying museums and art, there would be no inspiration for future artists. But on the whole, I still understand Marinetti’s point, and think that no matter what you believe, there will always be a future.
Aya
January 31st, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Thorough the reading “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism” by F.T. Marinetti, I had hard time accepting the theory. Marinetti’s theory of the art is missing the appreciation to the past art works. He says on the article, “We will destroy the museums, libraries, academies of every kind, will fight moralism, feminism, every opportunistic or utilitarian cowardice.” Destorying is beauty…maybe. However, we are living in a certain sense of culture, which had been built in the past, and many of us love and appreciate those culture and art. For me, art has to be understood and be appreciated by somebody (doesn’t have to be everybody), but Futurism artists do not even want to be. I guess that kind of action, which usually people hate, could be art. In someway, art, especially conceptual art, is hard to be understood by every single person. However, when I looked at pictures on his web page and arts on other Futurist’s web page, I thought Maribetti’s aggressive manifesto does not apply to most of Futurism art works. The design of architecture by Antonio Sant’Elia looked pretty amazing. I didn’t feel any of antipathy towards beauty of common world. The building was truly blended into the environment. I do not know details of the work, but I thought it would be nice to see.
cassandra
January 31st, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I felt that Marinetti’s manifesto is still relevant today in a sense that the ideas of courage and revolt in art, as well as art continuing to move forward, continue. I found the manifesto to be invigorating, passionate, and wild– much like William S. Burroughs’ writing, which is frantic and surreal. In the sentence: “Let’s give ourselves utterly to the unknown” I sensed a “modern” connection. Artists still throw themselves into the unknown with their works whether they include that idea in their own manifestos. . .
jennysharaf
February 2nd, 2008 at 10:18 am
Marinetti’s manifesto is an idealistic moment in the history of modern art. The futurists had great intentions of bringing art into life and breaking up the elitist establishment, but in the end I don’t think that they accomplished these things. The futurist movement was fueled by literature and their visual representations of these writings were often far less powerful. If you look at just the paintings, they appear as romantic studies of light and movement. They in no way speak of injustice or violence. Despite this, the manifesto is very written with genuine inspiration and passion. Today, artists are struggling with the same issues of emerging technologies changing our society. As for glorifying war and fighting feminism, I’m not on the same page. Anything that is written this theatrically cannot be taken as seriously as intended.
Elyse Mercedes
February 2nd, 2008 at 11:52 am
The manifesto has a realness to it. The choice of words to express the emotions give the manifesto life. I see manifesto still living in todays writings and art. It is very progressive. “deep-chested locomotives whose wheels paw the tracks like the hooves of enormous steel horses bridled by tubing” that quote in number 11. That is pure poetry. The Manifesto does have the sense of the times when it was written, but it could adapted to todays poets and artist.
chrisvogel
February 2nd, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Wow. This guy was serious. Although his manifesto is brilliant in it’s demand for acknowledgment an change, he almost comes off ignorant or elitist. “Time and Space died yesterday. We already live in the absolute, because we have created eternal, omnipresent speed.” I find his manifesto relevant today when I consider the parallel between modern art and capitalism. Marinetti makes it very clear the past and previous work are irrelevant. He stands for reconstruction. To rebuild and replace what’s already been done and leave the ruins in his wake. He denies the very foundation for his new era. I think it’s especially interesting when he regards museums as cemeteries. “But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!”
lauren mackey
February 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 pm
To me, Marinetti is certainly full of passion in his manifesto, but to me, its lacking quite a bit of sense. Not that I’m trying to make everything he wrote into literal, black-and-white terms, but the main thing I really have a hard time with is how he is basically dissing past works and history, and trying to act like society doesn’t need any of that. Sorry, but without those past works and histories, none of what these futurist artists are trying to show would seem important; instead it would be confusing and would come off more prissy and convoluted than some of it already does. I feel that everything that has already happened or been done, serves as building blocks for those to come afterwards. You can’t just turn your back on that. You may not like things/elements of the past, but you don’t have to make it difficult for everyone else.
magropp
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
I really enjoyed this manifesto. It is beautifully naive and supremely idealistic. Naivete is not always a hindrance, sometimes it is an intrinsic part of being strong and ready to forge ahead. “[about the future] But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!” the futurists are angsty, naive teenagers who ignore the past in order to embrace the grimy-rich future/present and hurl themselves chaotically and dangerously into the unknown, but they are so cute! I imagine young men in suits and bow ties, sitting in cafes, pooling their collective machismo whilst pontificating wildly about the beauty of struggle, violence, and industry. “Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can be a masterpiece” Naive, but oh so likable.
Evan Caminiti
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I really enjoy Marinetti’s writing for his intense imagery and fervor. However, I disagree with many of the ideas he communicates. While I understand his distain for art of past on one level, one cannot deny the importance of having respect and learning from one’s elders, and Marinetti implies that there is little value in such things. It is strange to analyze this manifesto being someone who has grown up my whole life around advanced technology, and over the years seeing how some of that technology has done much harm in the long run. I simply cannot agree with Marinetti’s love for machinery and industry even though those things are primary components of everyday life. Furthermore, Marinetti’s love for war and militarism and anti-feminism is frightening and comes across as idealistic and oblivious to human needs. With current crises such as peak oil we can see that a move away from living in harmony with natural world and embracing industry isn’t really working out.
Jennytam
February 4th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I can agree with some of the ideals expressed in “Manifesto”. I can agree that art based on new ideals instead of the old is a good thing, I can agree to violent births of new concepts at the proverbial cost of the old. But I can’t agree completely with the literal destruction of old concepts, old ideals. I like (my interpretation of) the idea of building from scratch without blueprints of older famous works overshadowing and limiting what could be due to a previously established notion. I am reminded of the last installment of Neon Genesis: Evangeline where the lead character is pondering the true meaning of freedom:
“here is a world with no boundaries, not even gravity. but it makes me feel uneasy, so here is a line, to signify the ground; and here i am confined to the ground and can no longer fly…”
In art and concepts, however, it is truly refreshing when an idea is born from no boundaries and presented to a world that may or may not accept it.
Well I guess I can’t say it wasn’t lacking passion. While I am reading the Manifesto of Futurism I’m constantly unsure if the piece is meant to be a mocking of the Industrial Era or a genuine experiment in the passion of hatred.
Though I’m not entirely sure if it’s related to the main theme, my favorite quote is “Museums: absurd abattoirs of painters and sculptors ferociously slaughtering each other with color-blows and line-blows, the length of the fought-over walls!” Maybe he is referring to a broader issue of competition in the zeitgeist.
In a way, I think Marinetti’s “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism,” does have relevance in today’s society. In today’s society, we are mostly driven by technology, the future, and the machine. The natural world is slowly slipping into the background. Marinetti also embraces the beauty of speed, which fits well into todays fast paced world. People are always wanting the lastest and fastest in technology, and this idea is ever present when creating new things. However, when Marinetti talks about destroying the past to live in the future, I think this contradicts everything the future stands for. When you think of today’s technology, everything is a progression of things created in the past. Without the past as its core, there would be no ideas for the future. By destroying museums and art, there would be no inspiration for future artists. But on the whole, I still understand Marinetti’s point, and think that no matter what you believe, there will always be a future.
Thorough the reading “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism” by F.T. Marinetti, I had hard time accepting the theory. Marinetti’s theory of the art is missing the appreciation to the past art works. He says on the article, “We will destroy the museums, libraries, academies of every kind, will fight moralism, feminism, every opportunistic or utilitarian cowardice.” Destorying is beauty…maybe. However, we are living in a certain sense of culture, which had been built in the past, and many of us love and appreciate those culture and art. For me, art has to be understood and be appreciated by somebody (doesn’t have to be everybody), but Futurism artists do not even want to be. I guess that kind of action, which usually people hate, could be art. In someway, art, especially conceptual art, is hard to be understood by every single person. However, when I looked at pictures on his web page and arts on other Futurist’s web page, I thought Maribetti’s aggressive manifesto does not apply to most of Futurism art works. The design of architecture by Antonio Sant’Elia looked pretty amazing. I didn’t feel any of antipathy towards beauty of common world. The building was truly blended into the environment. I do not know details of the work, but I thought it would be nice to see.
I felt that Marinetti’s manifesto is still relevant today in a sense that the ideas of courage and revolt in art, as well as art continuing to move forward, continue. I found the manifesto to be invigorating, passionate, and wild– much like William S. Burroughs’ writing, which is frantic and surreal. In the sentence: “Let’s give ourselves utterly to the unknown” I sensed a “modern” connection. Artists still throw themselves into the unknown with their works whether they include that idea in their own manifestos. . .
Marinetti’s manifesto is an idealistic moment in the history of modern art. The futurists had great intentions of bringing art into life and breaking up the elitist establishment, but in the end I don’t think that they accomplished these things. The futurist movement was fueled by literature and their visual representations of these writings were often far less powerful. If you look at just the paintings, they appear as romantic studies of light and movement. They in no way speak of injustice or violence. Despite this, the manifesto is very written with genuine inspiration and passion. Today, artists are struggling with the same issues of emerging technologies changing our society. As for glorifying war and fighting feminism, I’m not on the same page. Anything that is written this theatrically cannot be taken as seriously as intended.
The manifesto has a realness to it. The choice of words to express the emotions give the manifesto life. I see manifesto still living in todays writings and art. It is very progressive. “deep-chested locomotives whose wheels paw the tracks like the hooves of enormous steel horses bridled by tubing” that quote in number 11. That is pure poetry. The Manifesto does have the sense of the times when it was written, but it could adapted to todays poets and artist.
Wow. This guy was serious. Although his manifesto is brilliant in it’s demand for acknowledgment an change, he almost comes off ignorant or elitist. “Time and Space died yesterday. We already live in the absolute, because we have created eternal, omnipresent speed.” I find his manifesto relevant today when I consider the parallel between modern art and capitalism. Marinetti makes it very clear the past and previous work are irrelevant. He stands for reconstruction. To rebuild and replace what’s already been done and leave the ruins in his wake. He denies the very foundation for his new era. I think it’s especially interesting when he regards museums as cemeteries. “But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!”
To me, Marinetti is certainly full of passion in his manifesto, but to me, its lacking quite a bit of sense. Not that I’m trying to make everything he wrote into literal, black-and-white terms, but the main thing I really have a hard time with is how he is basically dissing past works and history, and trying to act like society doesn’t need any of that. Sorry, but without those past works and histories, none of what these futurist artists are trying to show would seem important; instead it would be confusing and would come off more prissy and convoluted than some of it already does. I feel that everything that has already happened or been done, serves as building blocks for those to come afterwards. You can’t just turn your back on that. You may not like things/elements of the past, but you don’t have to make it difficult for everyone else.
I really enjoyed this manifesto. It is beautifully naive and supremely idealistic. Naivete is not always a hindrance, sometimes it is an intrinsic part of being strong and ready to forge ahead. “[about the future] But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!” the futurists are angsty, naive teenagers who ignore the past in order to embrace the grimy-rich future/present and hurl themselves chaotically and dangerously into the unknown, but they are so cute! I imagine young men in suits and bow ties, sitting in cafes, pooling their collective machismo whilst pontificating wildly about the beauty of struggle, violence, and industry. “Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can be a masterpiece” Naive, but oh so likable.
I really enjoy Marinetti’s writing for his intense imagery and fervor. However, I disagree with many of the ideas he communicates. While I understand his distain for art of past on one level, one cannot deny the importance of having respect and learning from one’s elders, and Marinetti implies that there is little value in such things. It is strange to analyze this manifesto being someone who has grown up my whole life around advanced technology, and over the years seeing how some of that technology has done much harm in the long run. I simply cannot agree with Marinetti’s love for machinery and industry even though those things are primary components of everyday life. Furthermore, Marinetti’s love for war and militarism and anti-feminism is frightening and comes across as idealistic and oblivious to human needs. With current crises such as peak oil we can see that a move away from living in harmony with natural world and embracing industry isn’t really working out.
I can agree with some of the ideals expressed in “Manifesto”. I can agree that art based on new ideals instead of the old is a good thing, I can agree to violent births of new concepts at the proverbial cost of the old. But I can’t agree completely with the literal destruction of old concepts, old ideals. I like (my interpretation of) the idea of building from scratch without blueprints of older famous works overshadowing and limiting what could be due to a previously established notion. I am reminded of the last installment of Neon Genesis: Evangeline where the lead character is pondering the true meaning of freedom:
“here is a world with no boundaries, not even gravity. but it makes me feel uneasy, so here is a line, to signify the ground; and here i am confined to the ground and can no longer fly…”
In art and concepts, however, it is truly refreshing when an idea is born from no boundaries and presented to a world that may or may not accept it.