Futurism, objectivity, and the scorn for women.

In 1909, Founder of the Futurism art movement summed up the objectives as "We will glorify war - the world's only hygiene - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for and scorn for women."

Not a good way to win this girl over.

I do so enjoy the art that this movement but it was, obviously, a movement full of men. (not totally; Natalia Goncharova was a prominent painter on the scene at the time.) It sounds good in the beginning. An art movement that embraces technology that was gaining speed at the turn of the century. Not just technology but change, media, and how it shapes our little lives.

But as it became engrossed in politics, and some of the artists embracing fascism and war (not too surprising since the movement started in Italy 1909), my feelings start to turn a little sour. I love the sense that I get from some the works, invoking the sensations of the world’s first big cosmopolitan cities. Beautiful light, color and always interesting movement. And because of Futurism movement, Art Deco was born, for which I will forever be grateful.

So the real question is, can you still love the art when the original intention of the art (or the artist) is something you are fundamentally against?

Can you like a painting by a serial killer? Or a member of the KKK? Hitler was a painter…

Can you look objectively?